After Iowa State lost within the opening hours of the first round (sic) of the NCAA Tournament, I didn’t even bother checking my bracket (IlliNIT Blues) until yesterday since I had figured my horrible Final Four prognostication skills (having had first weekend losers Iowa State and Villanova in addition to Kentucky and Wisconsin) would leave me in smoldering ashes. So, I was quite surprised to see that I’m second place in my work pool and nearly in the top 5% of the ESPN brackets nationwide. Granted, my entry is guaranteed to have a Harrison Ford-piloted crash like the 1969 Cubs (or 1984 Cubs or 2003 Cubs or 2008 Cubs) since my points possible remaining are extremely low (as in Illinois basketball scoring in crunch time low), but it goes to show you how there’s still life even when half of your Final Four is gone within a 72 hour period.
As noted in last week’s post, the conference realignment front is fairly quiet these days for the power leagues with the exception of the prospect of Arizona State joining Big Ten hockey. However, there are some rumblings in the non-FBS Division I conferences that are basketball-focused, so let’s get the lay of the land:
(1) Big East Expansion (or lack thereof) – The Big East has the ability to poach any non-FBS Division I school that it wants (which is something that not even the Big Ten or SEC can say at the FBS level). Every school from the Atlantic 10, West Coast Conference, Missouri Valley Conference and any other non-FBS league would take a Big East invite immediately. From there, any Big East expansion would have a massive trickle-down effect on the conferences below them. However, the Big East is sort of in the same position as the Big 12: it really does want to expand (regardless of what their respective commissioners and other PR people might say publicly), but the issue is that there aren’t 2 glaringly obvious candidates. As I’ve stated previously, St. Louis University seems to be the main lock for a future Big East invite regardless of how they might be performing on-the-court at any given time. SLU has the TV market, academic institutional fit as a private Catholic university, geographic location as a bridge between Creighton and the rest of the league, and facilities that the Big East is looking for as a total package. So, the primary issue is finding a partner for SLU, which isn’t as clear. Dayton has played very well on-the-court with a great fan base along with being a private Catholic school, but its TV market isn’t as attractive, Xavier is close in proximity, and there’s going to be consternation within the league about adding two Midwestern schools (as opposed to finding at least one Eastern expansion candidate). VCU has also been great on-the-court and has a desirable location, but it’s a large public school that isn’t an institutional fit with the rest of the Big East. Wichita State (which we’ll examine even further in just a moment) has the same institutional fit problems as VCU with a much less desirable location and TV market. Richmond is a great academic school with a solid basketball program, but it competes in the same market as VCU with fewer fans and a lower national profile. Davidson is similar to Richmond and has the advantage of the Charlotte market, but has a very small enrollment and alumni base (albeit wealthy and academically elite).
If I were a betting person, SLU and Dayton are still the odds-on favorites to eventually get into the Big East once it decides to expand. I feel that the fact that VCU is a public school ultimately tanks their candidacy even though they are attractive on virtually all other factors that the Big East desires in terms of location, TV market, fan base and location. Wichita State has never been a realistic Big East candidate since their issues are much broader beyond being just a public university (as you’ll see below). Richmond might be able to wedge into the mix if they can get some more high profile NCAA Tournament runs – as of now, their on-the-court attributes are going to matter more than their off-the-court attributes (which already fit well with the Big East).
For now, the biggest emerging challenger to Dayton for spot #12 in the Big East is Davidson. The small number of students at Davidson isn’t optimal, but the Big East has always been more of a TV league dependent upon casual large market fans as opposed to an alumni-based league (unlike the Big Ten and SEC). Davidson is within the Charlotte TV market, has legitimately elite level academics, performs well on-the-court, and would address the wariness of Georgetown, Villanova and St. John’s of adding two Midwestern schools. So, keep an eye out on Davidson on the Big East expansion front.
(2) Wichita State: Nowhere to Run – The non-FBS school that I get asked about the most lately regarding switching conferences is Wichita State (and that has accelerated this past week with their current Sweet Sixteen run). I certainly understand the fan love – as you can see from my bracket, I have the Shockers going to the Elite Eight (and as far off as I was on Iowa State, I was equally convinced that Wichita State would come out blazing against Kansas). However, as much as Wichita State was wrongly underrated by the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee this year, the school is overrated by most sports fans as a conference realignment candidate. When I started writing about conference realignment with the Big Ten expansion index, my credo was always: “Think like a university president, not like a sports fan.” Wichita State is a perfect example of the disconnect between the thought processes of sports fans and university presidents. Sports fans see Wichita State as a school with great fans and astounding on-the-court success with a recent Final Four appearance and a memorable takedown of Kansas to get to the Sweet Sixteen this year. However, university presidents see Wichita State as a non-flagship public school that’s ranked in the 200s in the U.S. News rankings that’s located in a small TV market with little recruiting value (whether for athletes or “regular” college students). Remember that university presidents care just as much about what a school brings to the table when it’s awful on-the-field/court compared to how well it’s performing at its peak. Wichita State is a classic case of looking great for fans when they’re playing well, but it’s extremely tough for university presidents to see their value when they’re not playing well (as they’re not bringing academic prestige, an institutional fit, a major TV market, etc.).
Just look at the conferences that would be a step up from the MVC for Wichita State. The Big East, as noted above, is one of the most institutionally-aligned conferences outside of the Big Ten and Ivy League, where all members are private urban schools with a basketball focus. As a result, Wichita State simply isn’t a viable Big East candidate. The Atlantic-10 has some public universities, but it’s still more similar to the Big East as being private school-centric and the league may very well retrench from the Midwest if/when the Big East takes SLU. The American Athletic Conference (AAC) and Mountain West Conference (MWC) don’t seem interested at all in adding non-football members, so Wichita State won’t be considered. Even the West Coast Conference (which is a geographic stretch for Wichita State) has the same type of private school lineup as the Big East.
Unfortunately for Wichita State, it doesn’t matter how well the Shockers might perform on-the-court. Much like the power conference invite prospects for UConn (who has been an elite men’s and women’s basketball power), the off-the-court issues prevail in conference realignment and, as the old adage goes, “It takes two to tango.” Wichita State can want to leave the MVC all that it wants, but the conferences hold the power here. It’s not Wichita State’s choice to make to leave, so its only realistic option is to strengthen the MVC.
(3) MVC Expansion and UAB (and the Chain Reaction for the Horizon League and Others) – Fortunately for Wichita State, the debacle of UAB getting its football program stripped by the University of Alabama power brokers in Tuscaloosa (with new allegations that it was a predetermined decision that was railroaded through the UAB leadership) might end up having a solid UAB basketball program that just scored a huge upset of my Final Four pick Iowa State fall right into the laps of the MVC. Conference USA appears to want to have all members to have football, so the league may kick out UAB for having had the misfortune of being governed by self-interested political appointees from a more powerful campus. As a result, UAB’s future conference membership for basketball and other sports is in flux, with Al.com reporting that there is mutual interest between UAB and the MVC. As horrible as the UAB football situation has been, the MVC would be about as good of a landing spot for the UAB basketball program as it could reasonably expect and, in turn, UAB is about as good of an expansion candidate that the MVC could realistically invite.
If the MVC adds UAB, the league would be unlikely to stay at just 11 members. This means that it will have to find a 12th school somewhere, which could then cause a chain reaction throughout many of the non-FBS conferences below them. When the MVC was exploring expansion a couple of years ago and ultimately decided upon inviting Loyola, the league had explored UIC and Valparaiso of the Horizon League heavily. This makes sense from a university president perspective – all 3 of Loyola, UIC and Valpo are located in the Chicago market, which is where a disproportionate number of MVC students and alums live. (A notable exception to this is Wichita State, which doesn’t have much of an alumni presence in the Chicago area.) The basketball fans within the MVC would probably prefer a pure on-the-court-focused addition like Murray State (although Valpo does have some on-the-court bona fides), but I’d expect MVC school #12 to be another Chicago market school. The demographics of the MVC generally look like the old Big 8, which isn’t sustainable for a league for the long-term. The irony is that Wichita State, the most important school in the MVC, would likely be unhappy about another Chicago area school, yet the rest of the MVC membership knows that Wichita State can’t go anywhere else for the reasons set forth above (which means that the most valuable school in the conference might have the least say in expansion matters).
This prospect of MVC expansion might be why the Horizon League commissioner has already said that it’s in the “active phase” of expansion and the league would likely expand in the near future. The Horizon League has already been interested in schools like Northern Kentucky (currently in the Atlantic Sun) and Belmont (an Ohio Valley Conference member) and the conference may need to also backfill in the event that it gets raided by the MVC (which could put Summit League schools such as Nebraska-Omaha into play).
As you can see, even one move by a smaller conference like the MVC could end up triggering large repercussions throughout Division I conferences. If the Big East were to expand, it could cause mass-scale change for non-FBS conferences on the level that we saw in 2010-2013. Of course, if the Big 12 were to expand, then all bets are truly off throughout college sports.
(Image from Fox Sports)
FRANK THE TANK'S SLANT 
Hawkeyes #1!!
LikeLike
Corman–
LikeLike
Hook ’em
LikeLike
Go Terps — channel the spirit of ’06 (“The Shot,” “Overtime Is Our Time,” phrases familiar to any Maryland fan) and beat Duke!
LikeLike
GEAUX #1 LSU Baseball Tigers!
Frank – not that it really matters for realignment purposes, but Wichita State has a proud baseball tradition. The Shockers have a CWS championship under their belt and two CWS runner-up titles (each losses to my Tigers).
Strangely enough, two of my most fond college sports memories involve Wichita State. My Tigers beat the now defunct Wichita State football team 47-0 in the very first football game I attended as a college student. Also, I witnessed my Tigers beat the Shockers to win their first of six CWS titles.
LikeLike
I think it’s foolish for the AAC and Mtn. West not to expand with non-football additions. For these leagues, it just isn’t true that all the money is in football; with football, they are making less TV money than the Big East does without it. Plus, they have to pay for the expenses of football without extra TV money to help fund it.
Meanwhile, there are really good basketball schools out there that could help them with basketball TVs money and with NCAA tournament money, which can actually add up to something significant with a lot of bids, especially if they advance.
The MWC has Gonzaga just hanging out there, all but guaranteeing an NCAA unit or two every year, yet it insists that it only cares about football. The Zags, would be a low risk, high reward addition, since the Zags wouldn’t be getting money for the football portion of the contract.
The AAC is a decreasingly bad home compared to the old Big East for Cincinnati and UConn. Just two of 11 schools made the Dance. Adding a Wichita State or a VCU or a Dayton would help salvage the basketball product without watering down (any further) the football product. They would help create more AAC games worth watching and putting on ESPN, rather than ESPNEWS. They would not only help ensure more NCAA bids. They would help improve RPI for bubble teams like Tulsa and Temple, helping to increase the bids for the whole league.
LikeLike
Since they added Navy as a football-only, one could argue the AAC has room for 1 non-football school, in which case either WSU or VCU could work. The MWC has Hawaii as a similar football outlier (Gonzaga, although I think the WCC is a good home so long as BYU is there also – except for the travel, Rice might look into the WCC also, particularly if Grand Canyon matures as a program, for #11 and #12).
In my nightmare scenario of the the BE getting too big for its own good (16 teams) – I have SLU, Dayton and Belmont (Nashville) as a west flank expansion, and Davidson, Richmond and a 2nd New England team (Holy Cross, BU, Northeastern) as the east flank expansion.
LikeLike
Rice can’t go to the WCC as long as the Owls play football. CUSA wants to be an all-sports league and would not allow them to stay. MWC wouldn’t take them either. And I pray we never see the Sun Belt.
LikeLike
I would like to See more of Amy and Scotty and me know Madre won’t let me see it
LikeLike
The AAC is a decreasingly bad home compared to the old Big East for Cincinnati and UConn.
Cincinnati and UConn were the biggest losers of the last round of re-alignment, since they’re the schools who were plausible P5 candidates, but didn’t get offered. There is no better home for them right now. They simply have to wait and hope.
If the BIg XII invites BYU, Cincy has a decent shot at being #12, although I suspect the two Florida schools might have a thing or two to say about that. I don’t see any realistic shot for UConn anytime soon.
LikeLike
It should have said “depressingly,” not decreasingly, bad.
I understand that UConn and Cincy, for now, are stuck where they are until some more dominoes fall with the Big 12/ACC/B1G, but the AAC ought to accommodate for those schools’ thirst for good basketball competition. UConn is tied for fifth all time in national championships. It should matter to the league to give them the best basketball league they can. And the rest of the membership would benefit, too.
As for he concern about the past experience with the hybrid, they are already doing that with Navy being football only. And if there are non football members added, it wouldn’t be the 50% football, 50% non football situation all over again. There would be 11 full time members, 1 football only, and 1 non football. That shouldn’t divide the league the same way.
LikeLike
Michael in Raleigh,
“I think it’s foolish for the AAC and Mtn. West not to expand with non-football additions.”
On the other hand, they saw what a split membership did to the BE.
LikeLike
They saw what massively unbalanced all-sports / olympic-sports did for the old Big East, so the simple solution would be to not do that. Learning the lessons of the old Big East that adding an olympic-sport school to match a FB-only school is a bad idea is learning more lesson than the old Big East has available to teach.
LikeLike
Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, Tulsa.
A lot of them are down, but they have lots of history. There’s no reason to add a WSU or VCU or Dayton.
MWC is doing fine.
LikeLike
For Big East expansion – St. Louis fits the profile, but are they any better placed going forward then Northeastern or Boston U? Either (or both) of those schools increases the Big East blueprint in the Northeast- exactly where the Big East want to double down (alumni/geography), are urban, private, large endowments, great academics, nice stadiums, natural rivalries with existing members (PC).
Attendance is a problem. The students are smart enough to know when they are rooting for a minor league product in a lower league- in Boston people have better things to do. But get them in on the Fox contract and have them hire a $2 million/year coach and a top staff, and the winning will follow (unless you are Depaul). Give it a couple of seasons with a couple of wins on televised games against Nova, Gtown, Marquette, and the students will rally. These schools get students nationally – theres nothing intrinsic to the student populations that drives them off of college basketball.
Heck, Davidson’s arena seats 5K, and Frank has them down as a serious competitor.
LikeLike
@George – Oh, the Big East would love it if Northeastern or BU became even merely consistently mediocre in basketball. Either of those schools with base level competent basketball programs would be extremely attractive for the Big East. We could put Duquesne in the same category. The problem is that they still aren’t at those minimum levels yet. If they can get there (i.e. Northeastern building upon its NCAA Tournament appearance this year and getting there consistently), then there would be quite a bit of interest.
LikeLike
You are correct about the Boston schools (the BE would love to have a presence in that market) but BU, while having strong academics, seems ambivalent about sports other than hockey, having left America East to go to the Patriot League rather than, say, the A-10.
LikeLike
Think all three schools know they would be on the proverbial shortlist if they could improve their situation? If so, you’d think the advantages to increasing their investment in men’s bball would be obvious- join the Big East and get more publicity, greater alumni interaction etc. etc….
LikeLike
Any thoughts on Duqesne being added? It’s a decent sized Catholic school in Pittsburgh which is both Northeast and Midwest.
LikeLike
They’ve been horrible in basketball.
LikeLike
The AAC should absolutely snatch up Wichita St. The Shockers basketball profile is huge right now and would totally help the image of the AAC. Multiple bids for sure.
LikeLike
It is not well-understood just how much the Big East presidents do not want their conference to be hemmed in as a “Catholic league.” Rather, their brand should be thought of primarily as major metropolitan basketball schools. They were quite keen on inviting Butler for that and many other reasons. The private-school focus is there, but may not be seen as essential if the right candidate comes along. For that reason it is thinkable that a VCU or UMass could be considered.
The main goal of the next Big East expansion should be to expand the footprint and maintain the brand that exists (and diversify the membership a bit by adding a running mate for Butler). That seems to point to Richmond or Davidson along with St. Louis.
I still wonder if Fox woild want the league to look west and examine BYU with its established national fanbase and Gonzaga (which has acquired some national fans as well) as possibilities. Neither are major metro but each has appeal on the TV screen. Not ideal for the Olympic sports but this is all about basketball.
LikeLike
The West Coast Conference is already an imperfect mirror of the Big East on the West Coast – mostly Catholic institutions (save Pepperdine and BYU) in major metro areas. For Fox, adding Gonzaga and BYU to the BE might be enticing, but for either BYU or Gonzaga, their is no sense in them leaving – a “lateral move” to the MWC does nothing (and for Gonzaga would require a football program) and a move to the BE might have more prestige but nightmarish program costs (travel). I might try instead to start a BE-WCC event or series of games and cross fingers that LMU or Pepperdine emerge as a sort of high-midmajor foil for Gonzaga. A larger WCC is also where UDenver and the oft-ridiculed Incarnate Word (San Antonio, TX) should be thinking about landing.
LikeLike
Might the MVC be interested in Belmont itself if it takes UAB? They’re in the same direction, in major metro areas.
LikeLike
Today’s Sun Times referred to Frank Kaminsky of UWisconsin as “Frank the Tank.” Will this require a cease and desist for nickname infringement.
LikeLike
Frank,
I’ve followed and appreciated your blog for a long time. However, if I hear “Think like a university president” one more time…
As a university president, a conference based network would allow all sorts of innovative opportunities to showcase the conference schools. Newscasts and programming run by, and training the next generation, of broadcasters, a showcase for the arts, children’s programming ala The Mickey Mouse Clubhouse but with mascots, maybe revive “The College Bowl”, extension programming, etc. in addition to athletics.
It’s not about education. It’s entirely about sports and money. These people–the Presidents and Chancellors–have completely forfeited any pretense of academic integrity. They are in it for the money, period, and by the criteria they’ve chosen and the path they’ve laid out, they are network programmers. Network executives. Period. And their obligation is precisely to the sports fan–the audience.
They’ve left the ivory tower and now they can d–n well give us the best possible sports television product available.
UConn basketball should have been in the B1G yesterday. If there’s an audience for Wichita State buckets, serve it.
For that matter, forget the whole “student-athlete” thing and just sponsor pro or semi-pro teams.
These Presidents and Chancellors want to endorse the checks but don’t want any ink smudges on their hands. They don’t care how many years of tradition die, how many rivalries pass into oblivion, or how many schools are passed up to shrivel and die because of some perceived inferiority in “metrics” or brand.
“Think like a college president…” That’s the entire problem–too much thinking like a college president which yields the exact same result as not thinking at all.
LikeLike
Counter-point. The Sun Belt has at least twice had the motion presented to add Liberty. The Flames are compatible in budget, reasonably compatible in attendance, fill the need for a 12th member, fit fairly reasonably geographically in the west, can be added without disrupting the natural western division of two each in Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas. They have been a non-starter in Sun Belt expansion discussions because they don’t fit the academic profile of the Sun Belt.
LikeLike
“Think like a University President” is not saying its a good thing, just saying its the best way to understand the moves that get made. And also note that “Think like a University President” most definitely does NOT mean “oh, its about the Education” … a University President is not an “educator”, he or she is an ACADEMIC POLITICIAN. So, yes, its about the money, but its not JUST about the money in the athletic department, its also about the money across the University as a whole. Its about the research grants and chowing down on the slops at the corporate trough and all the other money flowing through a University, in addition to the sports money.
LikeLike
Just to expand on your thought… Since almost every Athletic Department requires some institutional support, every president knows that every dollar they get out of Athletics (TV, tickets, etc) is one dollar that can be used for academics.
LikeLike
Definitely … in the MAC, for example, if the subsidies to the AD departments of fielding athletic programs in the second tier of the FBS were not viewed in large part as a marketing expenditure, its hard to see why the MAC schools fought so hard against being relegated from the I-A to the I-AA when the first division was first split in the late 70’s.
LikeLike
Yes, that’s a good summation of how to think like a university president. When it comes to sport, they all want the money, and in most cases, they all want the “front door” that sports provide (Villanova for instance becomes more of a national school every time it makes a deep run in the NCAAs -sigh-). Third in importance, they want to associate with the kind of schools they aspire to be. That keeps the faculty onside (the Penn State faculty has an ongoing love affair with the B1G for that reason) and enhances each conference member’s brand (it’s nice for Syracuse to be mentioned in the same breath with Duke, and for BC to be housed with ND).
The caveat is that each university president is scared to death of one thing, and that’s scandal. It brings down presidents. But scandal is an occupational hazard of running a big-time (or even mid-major) athletic department these days.
LikeLike
@BruceMcF nailed it: “Think like a university president” doesn’t mean “education comes first”. It just means that “what fans want” doesn’t come first.
UConn basketball should have been in the B1G yesterday. If there’s an audience for Wichita State buckets, serve it.
You are thinking like a fan, not like a university president.
LikeLike
Yes, I agree. I’ve never posited that thinking like a university president was a wholesome academic exercise. Quite to the contrary, I’ve written many times here before that I find much of what university presidents and their NCAA minions say and do to be blatantly hypocritical. All I’m saying is that university presidents don’t look solely to on-the-field/on-the-court results. There is a mix of financial, demographic and branding issues that they find to be more important that may or may not have any correlation with athletic competitiveness.
LikeLike
Keith,
Bitter much?
“I’ve followed and appreciated your blog for a long time. However, if I hear “Think like a university president” one more time…”
If you want to understand expansion moves, you need to think like a university president because they are the ones making the final decisions. You don’t have to agree with them, but you need to think like them. Think of it like profiling a serial killer if that helps.
“As a university president, a conference based network would allow all sorts of innovative opportunities to showcase the conference schools. Newscasts and programming run by, and training the next generation, of broadcasters, a showcase for the arts, children’s programming ala The Mickey Mouse Clubhouse but with mascots, maybe revive “The College Bowl”, extension programming, etc. in addition to athletics.
It’s not about education. It’s entirely about sports and money.”
There was talk of doing some of that with BTN and the LHN actually did have a lot of non-athletic programming at the start (I don’t know if they still do). But you’re thinking like a professor here. A president understands that the biggest advantage to having a network is the marketing of the school to potential donors and future students. Sports serve the same purpose. Schools need a way to make themselves known to potential students. That’s especially true in the B10 where the demographics in the footprint are trending down for colleges. Thus the drive to expand to the east and the large and rapidly growing states there. That was as much about getting future out-of-state students for B10 schools as anything. So yes, it’s all about sports and money. What you fail to understand is that sports and money are means to an end – helping a university thrive long term.
“These people–the Presidents and Chancellors–have completely forfeited any pretense of academic integrity.”
That’s obviously untrue. The P5 conferences were careful not to dilute their academic standards much if at all. Multiple potential expansion candidates were rejected for academic reasons. You only look at the moves that were made and not at all the ones that weren’t.
“They are in it for the money, period, and by the criteria they’ve chosen and the path they’ve laid out, they are network programmers. Network executives. Period.”
What a crock. If they were only in it for the money, they would make very different decisions. The P12 rejecting OU because of OkSU? UT having a TT problem in terms of the B10? Boise unable to find a better home for one of the top football programs of the past 10-20 years? BYU can’t find a P5 home?
And the presidents have little to nothing to do with programming of networks. They set some standards and then let professionals run them while cashing the checks.
“And their obligation is precisely to the sports fan–the audience.”
Only a fan would think that. The presidents have obligations to their school, their students, their alumni (and their state if they’re public), but they don’t owe sports fans anything.
“UConn basketball should have been in the B1G yesterday.”
No, it shouldn’t. They are a terrible institutional fit for the B10 in many ways. They aren’t in a contiguous state. They aren’t a top research school (not even sniffing AAU status). They aren’t extremely large. They have a smaller number of varsity sports. They haven’t even been I-A for 20 years. The football stadium is tiny and 20 miles from campus.
That explains why UConn isn’t a full B10 member, and also why they aren’t an affiliate member. The B10 has only ever had one affiliate member, JHU for men’s lacrosse. JHU is an academic fit and provided something the B10 needed – a sixth team. UConn hoops would be a nice addition to any league, but they aren’t needed by the B10 to form a conference.
“If there’s an audience for Wichita State buckets, serve it.”
The audience isn’t that big or they’d be in a better league.
“For that matter, forget the whole “student-athlete” thing and just sponsor pro or semi-pro teams.”
Or actually run a university and tell the NFL and NBA to go sponsor some minor leagues instead. It’s not the fault of the presidents that athletes can’t go pro in the US straight out of high school.
“These Presidents and Chancellors want to endorse the checks but don’t want any ink smudges on their hands.”
Heaven forbid they have standards and lines they won’t cross.
“They don’t care how many years of tradition die, how many rivalries pass into oblivion,”
Not true. They care, they just care more about other things like the future of their university.
“or how many schools are passed up to shrivel and die because of some perceived inferiority in “metrics” or brand.”
Like the president of a company, a university president has to look out for his schools. The other schools have presidents that are supposed to look out for them. It’s not a charity where they get together and decide how to help everyone else out. UConn got passed up because others brought more to the table. No B10 or ACC president owes UConn anything.
LikeLike
You might be interested in a paper by Lifschitz, Saunder and Stevens (2014), “Football as a Status System in U. S. Higher Education,” Sociology of Education, vol. 87, p. 204:
http://soe.sagepub.com/content/87/3/204
They essentially demonstrate that universities sort themselves out in conferences according to academic rank, which supports your contentions.
I infer from their work that the B1G is unlikely to add anyone else unless Texas became available. Their work suggests Texas is in the wrong conference.
LikeLike
It’s not about education. It’s entirely about sports and money.
The PAC’s decision to pass on the Oklahoma schools and the Big Ten’s refusal to add FSU would beg to differ.
LikeLike
Couple thoughts.
1. One former member will be outside MVC meetings with flower and chocolates. The Sun Belt is expected to debate New Mexico State again the third week of May and most likely NMSU will once more gain a majority of votes but not the required 3/4ths vote.
2. Absent the MWC suddenly concluding it needs a 12th hoops member and that member not be from the west, Wichita State has three routes to realignment (not counting doing nothing which would be four).
Route A. Assume the so-so talk of FBS aspirations from Missouri State, Illinois State, and Indiana State is every bit as tepid as it appears on its face, conclude the Valley is stable and advocate growing the Valley into new places of significance by adding schools like Valpo, UAB, Denver, Belmont (or less plausibly far weaker Nashville neighbor Lipscomb or more plausible than Lipscomb but not significantly attractive Texas-Arlington or Arkansas-Little Rock)
Route B. Conclude even a tiny amount of smoke from the FCS playing schools is a concern and advocate exploring expansion to 18 by adding enough FBS to give FCS schools a place to be FBS without leaving though unlikely any potential candidate does much for hoops.
Route C. Try to form a new league though that seems pointless unless you can create a mixed league that includes enough FBS to be an FBS league and get the brand name out there in football season, otherwise there just aren’t enough value targets to warrant the hassle of starting over.
LikeLike
Wichita State is great and all, but I don’t think they are a school other schools will follow. In addition, any league they put together will be similar (from Wichita’s perspective) to the league they are already in why put in the work?
LikeLike
What could they put together better? MVC is always high on the RPI. Its always high on attendance. It was 9th last year, behind only the P5, AAC, MWC and BE. Only the 10th place A10 was anywhere close.
LikeLike
That’s the crux. With both representatives winning in the first round, the MVC is getting 5 units out of the 2015 tournament. That’s a good year for the MVC, but there is no guarantee that a conference that Wichita could “put together” would be a two-bid conference “in a good year”.
LikeLike
What will C-USA do if they boot UAB? And I’m not convinced they will, at least not yet – give them a couple years to see what they do on Football. But who if anyone would replace them in C-USA?
I do disagree with you on Omaha drawing any interest from the Horizon. Denver is the only school of any value in the Summit, and that isn’t much. I think adding Belmont or NKU or both is more than enough insurance to stay at 9 or go to 10 schools depending on what happens with UAB.
LikeLike
I think C-USA likes being in the state of Alabama, so they’ll give UAB time to re-evaluate their decision to drop football. But if that decision sticks, I don’t see UAB remaining in C-USA indefinitely.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25122321/umass-ad-asks-for-acc-invite-on-twitter-hes-joking-probably
Obviously no ACC for UMass.
But I do think that the American might add them and Army. The chances go up obviously if Cincy and/or others get bumped up to a Power 5 conference.
LikeLike
UMass might be better off dropping football and joining the Big East.
LikeLike
Then a big excuse – no public schools – for not adding VCU or Wichita State as a complementary goes away.
LikeLike
Perhaps … if the Big East would have them, which is not guaranteed.
LikeLike
That plan is a no-brainer I suggested about a year ago to get to 14. Army would probably be football only, and be int he East division in order to have primacy for Florida and Carolina area cadets, much as Navy really wanted Texas exposure in the West division. Cincy (if not picked off for the Big 12) would be moved into the West. This would also add some wrinkles into how the A-N-G should it remain on the 2nd December Saturday would be treated should either team win its respective division and be eligible for a hypothetical CCG. Perhaps no divisions at all, as long as there is a single true champion.
LikeLike
That plan is a no-brainer I suggested about a year ago to get to 14. Army would probably be football only,
Didn’t Army leave CUSA because they couldn’t compete? What has changed their thinking?
LikeLike
Army was in C-USA when TCU, Louisville, Cincy, USF, Houston, East Carolina, etc were in C-USA… Since all those schools moved up, 2 of them to Power Five Schools, the others mostly to the American conference…
Instead of competing with the above they’d be competing with Southern Miss, Charlotte, Marshall, Rice, UTEP, North Texas, Western Kentucky, Louisiana Tech, Old Dominion, Western Kentucky, etc. Teams they should be competitive with if they belong in Div I.
LikeLike
If Army wanted to join a conference … and there is no indication that they do … Conference USA v3.0 would seem to make more sense than The American, since joining the American would be joining an upgraded version of the Conference USA that they were forced to leave because the competition was too stiff.
LikeLike
One True Champion without a full round robin and/or CCG is even dumber than the Big 12’s failed One True Champion. I think for obvious reasons.
LikeLike
“That plan is a no-brainer I suggested about a year ago to get to 14.”
But “getting to 14” is no benefit on its own … more like the opposite. So the specific schools added have to be worth both the average contribution of two schools to a conference of 12, plus a bit more on top to compensate for the disadvantages of 14 over 12.
LikeLike
Back to the UAB situation, the Alabama BoT is indistinguishable from the Bryant Bank, The in-breeding runs deep in Tuscaloosa.
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/03/paul_bryant_jrs_bank_is_the_ti.html#incart_river
LikeLike
This keeps getting crazier.
LikeLike
This is similar to the PSU BoT situation, except with PSU it’s not merely with a bank and not just with one other entity. Once one understands the game, it’s much easier to understand why the Sandusky scandal went down the way it did, why the people in power are doing everything in their power to keep the truth hidden, and why sanctions were levied and accepted without an NCAA investigation and subsequently rescinded without going to trial. The people in power don’t want the truth to come out and will do almost anything to keep it from coming out. They have a lot to lose.
Pay careful attention to who wants the truth to come out in court and who doesn’t.
It’s fascinating to watch play out, and it’s only going to get better …
P.S. Some interesting reading:
Click to access 1-Complaint-in-Spanier-v.-Freeh-and-Penn-State.pdf
LikeLike
The Chairman of the athletic task force is essentially calling the president a liar. Says that the decision to kill football was made last summer.
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/03/wes_smith_carrsports_clearly_i.html
LikeLike
I have a question. Will Western Illinois University ever join the Missouri Valley outside of the football conference or any other conference that has an Illinois school in it. I graduated there and think it sucks to be in the summit. We don’t have a real team that we consider a rival. It used to be Eastern, but they left for the OVC. Then one started with Valpo in the 90s because for 3 straight years we played for the old mid con title, which sucked because Dad went To Valpo and they went to the sweet 16. Of course I never heard the end of that. So I just wish they would join the MVC full time or join the OVC with EIU so that we have an in state rival. I know Western doesn’t bring a lot at this point with having the same facilities as most high schools, but are going to build an on campus arena in the near future as they are going through a big up grade to the campus as a whole. So please give me some hope that we will leave the Summit and join a conference that has other Illinois schools in it. Even the Horizon would be ok, plus the schools would be closer.
Thanks Frank Jeff Bartlett High School, we talked about all the high changes that were happening in the past.
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
LikeLike
Frank
So I know we have emailed in the past about conference realignment, so I thought I would send you something that I heard may happen. You already know about the 3 valleys joining the DVC. Now there is talk about adding more and splitting into two. One part would include Lake Park. Glenbard North, Wheaton North, Wheaton Warrenville South, St. Charles North, St Charles East, Geneva and Batavia. Then the other half would be Waubonsie Valley, Nequa Valley, Metea Valley, Naperville North, Naperville Central, Bolingbrook and 2 schools yet to be determined. This is just rumor, but I know that the DVC and Upstate 8 have talked about some changes. That would leave Elgin, Bartlett, Streamwood, Larkin, South Elgin, East Aurora, West Aurora, West Chicago and Glenbard East in the Upstate 8. However I know there are teams like Dundee Crown, Hoffman Estates and Huntley that have expressed interest in joining. I just wish they would figure out what teams are going where, but all of it won’t matter because in about 5 – 10 years schools like Burlington Central – which has students that come from Elgin that live west of Randall, Kaneland and other schools just west of Elgin are growing and will be as big as the u-46 schools and will need a conference with schools that are the same size. So I figured I let you know on some of the high school rumblings. Just wish Bartlett could separate from other U-46 schools and join a conference that is at the same level of competition. By that I mean all schools have a freshman A and B squad as well as all levels we compete at. My idea for a conference would be Bartlett, South Elgin, Streamwood, Lake Park, Glenbard North, Hoffman Estates, Conant and Schaumburg. Why these schools, funny fact that everyone pulls from Hanover Park, where I grew up and went to Lake Park. Plus South Elgin is Bartletts rival which also has Barlett residents that attend it and Schauburg because they would be Conants and HEs rival. A perfect 8 team conference that schools would all be close and have the same levels for their programs. Of course it would be nice if they would just build a Hanover Park High School so that all the kids that grow up playing together can go to school together.
Thanks Jeff
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
LikeLike
Quesque se?
LikeLike
Hey, another reader from the western suburbs!
LikeLike
Yeah im trying to figure which shoes drop in the further north suburbs with the formation of a new conference of former small NSC teams plus the 2 Grayslakes. Waukegan will be leaving the CSL joining the remaining NSCs, (Stevenson, Warren, LF, Libertyville, LZ, Mundelein, ZionBenton and Vernon Hills) bumping it to 9, with the CSL (new trier, maines, glenbrooks) at 11 and looking for a 12th. So far Vernon H isvthe only applicant for the CSL slot – honestly its far too small enrollment (1,300) to even be in the North division. I think they’re better off in the MSL with Hoffman shifted to the east and Elk Grove shifted and Lake Park added to the MSL West. The Valleys plus Bolingbrook in the DVC is going to add a lot ofv speed and raw athleticism.
LikeLike
Hoffman Estates, Conant, and Schaumburg will never leave the Mid-Suburban League. The only school I could ever see leaving that league would be Barrington, since they are their own district and the farthest geographic outlier.
LikeLike
I’m actually surprised anyone takes my semi-anonymous ranting seriously–my wife has the good sense not to–and, yes, I am a little bitter at the level of insanity in the process.
What, for example, defines a Big Ten institution and at what point does television override other considerations? Since Nebraska and Michigan State already have collegiate rodeo, perhaps some combination of Penn State, Minnesota, Rutgers, et al could be encouraged to add the “sport” so there could be a B1G conference to provide programming. If necessary, they could always add Dickinson State as an associate.
There’s apparently always going to be some “special” circumstance that takes precedence when the COP/C want to justify something.
(In my opinion, the B1G could show some true leadership and tell them to hang up their spurs or find a new conference home.)
Keith
LikeLike
Keith,
“I’m actually surprised anyone takes my semi-anonymous ranting seriously”
We tend to give people the benefit of the doubt here and assume they’re serious.
“and, yes, I am a little bitter at the level of insanity in the process.”
I wouldn’t say it’s been insanity for the most part. There is a logic behind the moves, but not everyone needs to agree with their motivations.
“What, for example, defines a Big Ten institution … ?”
General characteristics of a B10 school:
large
state flagship
land grant school
AAU member
elite level research school
large and diverse athletic program
midwestern or (now) eastern
Characteristics of a B10 expansion candidate:
See above
In a state contiguous to the footprint
Adds enough athletic value to not reduce the per school payouts
There are clearly exceptions to all or most of these (NW is small and private, etc). But if you don’t come close on the academics, nothing else matters.
“… and at what point does television override other considerations?”
It doesn’t override the other considerations, it adds one. Not only do you need to check the institutional fit boxes, you also have to add to the financial pie. The B10 isn’t expanding to end up with the same payout per school it already has.
“Since Nebraska and Michigan State already have collegiate rodeo, perhaps some combination of Penn State, Minnesota, Rutgers, et al could be encouraged to add the “sport” so there could be a B1G conference to provide programming. If necessary, they could always add Dickinson State as an associate.”
There’s no value in having a B10 rodeo conference.
“There’s apparently always going to be some “special” circumstance that takes precedence when the COP/C want to justify something.”
You mean the one time they added an affiliate? The justification for the other expansion decisions seem blindingly obvious.
“(In my opinion, the B1G could show some true leadership and tell them to hang up their spurs or find a new conference home.)”
Why? The B10 schools have plenty of teams that don’t compete in the B10 – men’s volleyball, men’s rowing, lightweight rowing, rifle, pistol, fencing, bowling, water polo, women’s ice hockey and synchronized swimming. The B10 only sponsors 28 sports. OSU has 37 varsity teams.
LikeLike
What, for example, defines a Big Ten institution and at what point does television override other considerations?
Brian gave a great answer, but I’d add a few things:
Various presidents and ADs have said that any addition would have to be an AAU member and contiguous with the current footprint. It’s likely that any exception to those requirements would need to be truly extraordinary (e.g., Notre Dame or Texas). According to Barry Alvarez, at least one school was turned away for academic reasons.
But the conditions for entry to the Big Ten are changeable, because so are the people deciding.
It’s well known that the vote to admit Penn State was 7-3 in favor, just barely over the required 2/3rds threshold. Decades later, the B1G added Rutgers and Maryland, as far as we know unanimously, to ensure Penn State wouldn’t leave. Changed circumstances (and maybe changed personalities) bring a different outlook.
Obviously, Hopkins was added as an associate member only because of men’s lacrosse, something that the league never cared about until very recently. But Hopkins does satisfy the two conditions mentioned above: it’s an AAU member contiguous with the current footprint.
The criteria for associate members are probably a little looser than for full members, hence Arizona State for men’s hockey seems like a distinct possibility, even though they’d never be a candidate for full membership (non-AAU, non-contiguous). But the Sun Devils at least resemble a Big Ten institution. You’re not going to see the University of Denver or Bemidji State in Big Ten hockey.
The league has said that if it adds any new full members, it wants to grow south. Of course, by the time it has the opportunity to do so (if it ever does), there might be new people deciding, who could have new priorities. But if the decision were today, it would seem that Kansas is an unlikely addition, unless it comes as part of a package deal that involves one or more schools south of the current footprint.
It ought to go without saying that ALL conference re-alignment decisions are about money. No school or league makes a voluntary move to lose money. For most leagues, and certainly the Big Ten, re-alignment is mostly about football, because football earns so much more money.
So I think you could forget about UConn, which meets zero of the Big Ten’s known criteria: it’s non-AAU, it’s not contiguous to the current footprint, it does not have a valuable football program (nor does it have the potential to do so), and it’s not in the south.
LikeLike
“(In my opinion, the B1G could show some true leadership and tell them to hang up their spurs or find a new conference home.)”
That flips the Big Ten system on its head. In the current system, having the Big Ten sponsor a sport is treated as a privilege, so everyone can play any sport they want, but at least six schools are required for the Big Ten to host a championship in the sport. That is, indeed, part of the balancing of tensions between the smaller budget and larger budget schools, with part of the budget difference spent by the big budget schools in sponsoring a wider range of sports than the small budget schools do.
Heck, it seems that is embedded deeper into Big Ten culture than the reluctance to have associate members, since in the tension between the two with the addition of two Lacrosse playing schools, it was the affiliate membership norm that bent. And if ASU joined the Big Ten as an affiliate, they would be taking advantage of that first bending, since JHU was not a member of any other Division 1 conference, while ASU is a member of the other Division 1 conference with which the Big Ten has the deepest relationship.
LikeLike
Archie Manning quits the CFP selection committee and is replaced with former Vandy HC and Steve Martin lookalike Bobby Johnson.
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/109443/bobby-johnson-is-the-right-man-to-replace-archie-manning
LikeLike
OOC scheduling news.
Texas A&M and Colorado.
Vandy and Stanford.
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/109431/texas-am-colorado-set-up-series
LikeLike
Thanks for all the thoughtful and insightful information. I’d like to add a couple of points.
First, I really like the B1G Network. As an alumni of a “lesser” B1G program living in a distant state, it allows me for the first time to reliably view and follow my school on tv. (Lesser defined as lower-to-middling football–we can’t all be Ohio State or Michigan alums.)
I actually loved the Johns Hopkins add for lacrosse–it made sense on every level in my opinion.
(I enjoyed watching the Hopkins/Rutgers match yesterday. I don’t know much about lacrosse, but it was easy enough to pick up the basics. Those guys have to be in shape–that game would’ve killed your average college football lineman.)
However, exceptions should be just that–exceptions, not the rule. Arizona State is not Johns Hopkins and any school isn’t AAU and sponsors rodeo (as I believe AZ State does) should, almost by definition, not be considered B1G material. Unlike the situation with Hopkins, the B1G doesn’t need an additional hockey member.
Iowa (definitely), Nebraska (probably), and Illinois (if Frank wins the lottery) will be adding hockey soon enough.
But, if the B1G is just going into ad hoc network programming, then Boise State and Wichita State start looking like Big Ten material.
If you want to serve large alumni pockets, well–perhaps Portland State is available.
LikeLike
Keith,
I largely agree that adding ASU seems an odd step for the B10. The main reason people mention it is the close tie between the B10 and P12. I’m not sure that’s enough to justify flying to Tempe.
Several other things could be behind this, though:
1. The B10 has more alumni in Phoenix than the P12. A decent number of them are from schools playing B10 hockey, so this might be a good way to connect with them.
2. Having the NCAA minimum of 6 teams in the conference is a little risky.
3. Having only 6 teams makes for a very limited conference schedule. More teams means more games for BTN, too.
4. Hockey is a small sport and many worry that it may actually shrink. If adding ASU encourages other B10 or P12 schools to add hockey, then it may help the entire sport.
Both the WCHA and CCHA used to have Alaska schools, so the hockey teams are used to long trips once a year. Playing ASU wouldn’t be the end of the world. And it is an NHL city.
LikeLike
…any school isn’t AAU and sponsors rodeo (as I believe AZ State does) should, almost by definition, not be considered B1G material.
Say what?
LikeLike
Before the recent round of conference expansion, the B1G and the PAC 10 had reached a tentative agreement to have a very muched expanded and regular cross-conference scheduling. If that agreement had held, ASU would routinely be playing B1G teams in many sports, including hockey and football.
You can hardly say that ASU is unworthy; the tentative agreement shows they were pre-approved. Boise State and Wichita are, because:
http://soe.sagepub.com/content/87/3/204
LikeLike
A great year, and especially March, for OSU athletics continued this weekend with 2 more titles.
2015 OSU National Titles:
Football
Wrestling (2 individual champs, including the 4th ever 4x individual champ)
Synchronized swimming (OSU’s 29th title in it)
Pistol (repeat title from last year)
LikeLike
http://www.intermatwrestle.com/articles/14373
And not surprisingly, Logan Stieber won the Hodge Trophy (wrestling’s Heisman).
Four-time Ohio high school state champion. Junior Dan Hodge Trophy winner. Four-time Big Ten conference titlist. Four-time NCAA Division I wrestling champion, only the fourth wrestler to earn this distinction in 85 years of national mat championships. Dan Hodge Trophy winner. Now Ohio State’s Logan Stieber can add one additional honor to his impressive wrestling resume: 2015 InterMat Wrestler of the Year.
LikeLike
Meanwhile, 2015 has been pretty good for MSU, too. A top 5 finish in football with a NYD6 win over Baylor and yet another Final Four for Izzo.
LikeLike
It’s good enough to ignore, again, the dumpster fire that is their wrestling program. Dead last with negative .5 at the championships. They’d have been better off with no qualifiers – no opportunity to get a penalty. But the coach remains…
LikeLike
I was surprised to see 2 wrestlers (1 MSU, 1 MO) get punished at the championships. I’d expect better self-control at that level.
LikeLike
Around 650 individual combat matches with the season on the line. It’s not acceptable, but understandable to an extent. But the coaches should never lose it.
LikeLike
Another revenue sport, another season of hearing that the B10 isn’t any good, another season of the B10 showing up in the postseason.
Congratulations to WI and MSU on making the Final Four.
LikeLike
And as if on cue, some jackhole Domer (Cornett, sp.) was on 670 saying that a WI – MSU championship game would not help the sport as much as a “matchup with 2 blue blood programs”. I thought the B1G hate was the sole enterprise of the 4 letter network.
LikeLike
How is that “hate?” That would have been like someone in the 90s saying the Lakers/Celtics would be better for the NBA than the Rockets/Magic. People are so sensitive these days.
LikeLike
More from Matt Sarz on potential Fox, NBC, CBS, and Turner bids.
http://mattsarzsports.blogspot.com/2015/03/some-cutting-room-floor-items-re-big.html
LikeLike
Kentucky/Notre Dame drew an 8.4/16 rating. Highest rating ever for a single network college basketball game.
LikeLike
Saw something about it peaking at a 21 share, which is pretty incredible.
LikeLike
A tribute to the in-game audience pick-up potential of social networking.
LikeLike
Frank,
What are your thoughts on DePaul’s back-to-the-future hire of Dave Leitao? Should they have hired Bobby Hurley or Bryce Drew, or were they even realistic options?
LikeLike
i’m thinking Hurley really wanted the St. John’s job (now being taken by Chris Mullin) and dithered on a DePaul offer. It actually would be a larger leap from the MAC to the BE than from the Horizon to the BE (Drew-Valpo, Wardle-UWGB). That said, Hurley would be a killer get for the Rutgers program if that becomes available soon.
LikeLike
I agree. Hurley would be a coup for Rutgers.
LikeLike
The MVC schools, with Wichita way high at 10,732 attending per game, and LUC way low with 1,928 per game, get between 4,000 and 6,500 per game at each school. A survey of a dozen schools indicates everybody charges about the same price, so its pretty much apples to apples. That sort of sets a standard of what schools would fit the MVC as far as fan base goes, so I looked at the greater region, simply to see which schools could be considered. And here is the initial list (2013-14 attendance from NCAA, and 2014-15 RPI)
School Home Total per game 2014-15
Games Attend Attend RPI
UAB 17 73,161 4,304 117 (0.524)
ORU 13 55,069 4,236 157 (0.505)
UWGB 17 67,646 3,979 60 (0.563)
Murray 18 61,695 3,428 46 (0.575)
NDSU 13 43,008 3,308 88 (0.539)
Denver 13 40,543 3,119 236 (0.461)
UIC 14 42,140 3,010 296 (0.427)
UWM 13 37,014 2,847 209 (0.478)
Valpo 18 51,002 2,833 56 (0.566)
Belmont 14 38,067 2,719 99 (0.534)
SDSU 14 37,254 2,661 84 (0.543)
Detroit 15 37,082 2,472 206 (0.479)
NKU 14 25,829 1,845 262 (0.449)
Omaha 15 19,154 1,277 298 (0.424)
I threw Omaha and NKU in there because you mentioned it as possible for Horizon. But the numbers reveal they are not well supported programs.
For the MVC Alabama-Birmingham is a no brianer. But if the MVC goes for a 12th the metrics show Oral Roberts should be considered as well as Valpo and UIC. Their RPI is middling, but the high level of fan support and the Tulsa market would be a nice add, which would make Wichita less isolated. ORU is out of place in the SLC.
To my surprise Green Bay, Murray, and North Dakota State stand out for attendance and RPI. But they are all in the middle of nowhere. Green Bay is interesting in that it would add Wisconsin, and alumni are likely concentrated around Chicago. Denver, Detroit, and Milwaukee don’t quit measure up.
For the Horizon, Belmont looks way better than anyone else. They could absorb the loss of Valpo or UIC much better with them than either NKU or Omaha, neither of whom looks ready in terms of performance or support for the Horizon.
So I see it as UAB and one of UIC, Valpo, or perhaps ORU (I’d like your analysis of them) for the MVC. And Belmont for the Horizon. No additional trickle down seems likely.
LikeLike
ugh, awful format. It just wont take spreadsheet input. Well the values are supposed to be tab delimited, with these columns
1. School
2. Home Games
3. Total Attendance (2013-14)
4. Per Game Attendance (2013-14)
5. RPI (2015-16)
Sorry about the formatiing
LikeLike
http://www.intermatwrestle.com/articles/14372
Bad news for wrestling. Cleveland State is dropping the sport after next year and adding men’s lacrosse instead. Supposedly CSU will consider keeping wrestling if outside funding is found. Dropping wrestling seems an odd choice since northern OH is a hotbed for HS wrestling, but it begins to make sense when you read about their AD. He is a former college lacrosse player and his wife coaches college lacrosse. Also, it seems to fit the school’s strategic goals:
http://laxmagazine.com/college_men/DI/2014-15/news/091914_lacrosse_being_considered_at_cleveland_state_university
Cleveland State athletic director John Parry told Lacrosse Magazine on Friday that adding Division I men’s and women’s lacrosse for the spring 2016 season is under consideration as part of an enrollment strategy to attract more students to the school.
…
Cleveland State sits an on urban, downtown campus in Cleveland, and is a public university with an enrollment of more than 17,000 students. In August 2012, CSU welcomed its largest freshman class in history, with 1,550 students and applications reached a 30-year high that same year.
Parry said lacrosse would be part of a plan to attract “particularly more students from suburban, private schools that CSU doesn’t normally have access to,” he said. It’s a theme consistent with a trend of Midwest colleges looking to do just that.
…
“I personally love the sport,” he said. “I’ve been associated with it everywhere I was, until I got here. That’s the way we started it at Butler. It was more of an enrollment strategy. It’s in my blood, but it’s not a personal agenda. It’s not about ego. It’s got to make sense to the university. That’s what I’m trying to present, but I’m not trying to sugarcoat it.”
“It’s one of the options,” he said. “I can’t speak for the Enrollment Task Force and I can’t speak for the Board. I’m doing what I can to put it in front of them.”
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/03/cleveland_state_university_will_no_longer_fund_wrestling_but_will_add_lacrosse.html
CSU did not want to drop a sport but cannot afford the additional cost of about $900,000 a year to add two sports, because if it added lacrosse it would have to add a women’s sport to meet federal Title IX requirements, officials said Monday.
CSU would become only the second public university in Ohio to offer lacrosse. Ohio State University has men’s and women’s teams.
…
The university began discussing adding lacrosse in fall 2014 and had hoped its first team would be on campus this fall and compete in the spring of 2016.
At that time it had planned to add a women’s sport, either lacrosse or indoor/outdoor track and field, said Parry and President Ronald Berkman.
Public colleges are following the lead of their private counterparts in adding lacrosse, which in recent years has become the latest recruitment tool.
Relatively inexpensive to start, the sport has grown in popularity at high schools, especially those with middle-class students.
By offering the chance to play at the next level, colleges hope to attract students who otherwise wouldn’t have considered those campuses.
CSU added men’s lacrosse as a club sport in 2013.
…
A Division I men’s team has about 45 members.
They can afford to add 20 more male athletes, and it will not violate Title IX?
LikeLike
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/03/wrestling_supporters_need_to_s.html
This sounds a lot like blackmail to me. The AD knows wrestling is more popular in OH, especially around Cleveland.
As for external funding:
To survive, the wrestling program needs to raise $800,000 by March 31, 2016, which would fund the program for 2016 and 2017, Stehura said.
“All of this would give us time to reach a $5 million endowment to then secure the program,” he said.
He is turning to the legions of wrestling supporters in Northeast Ohio.
“There has always been strong wrestling support and honestly this is up to the community,” he said. “If they value everything that comes along with having a wrestling program at Cleveland State, it would be a validation of several people’s life’s work.”
I don’t blame the coach for trying to save his program, but I really hope the fans don’t give in to this blackmail and give CSU $5M. That would send entirely the wrong message in my opinion. I’d rather see them steer students away from CSU as a form of protest.
The reach of CSU’s 52-year-old wrestling program extends well beyond the university, he said. It has offered free wrestling camps for 30 years, which led to many youths continuing the sport in school, he said.
…
CSU had talked about adding men’s lacrosse as a varsity sport in the fall of 2014 but to do so it would have to add a women’s sport to meet federal guidelines.
But officials said Monday they decided the university could not afford the additional cost of about $900,000 a year to add two new sports. So it opted to use the funding from the wrestling program for lacrosse.
“So why add something if you don’t have the funding for it?” said Stehura, who has coached at CSU for six years.
LikeLike
Both LAX (12.6 scholarships) and wrestling (9.9) are equivalency sports. IIRC, for Title IX purposes they only count the scholarships so they only added 2.3 men.
LikeLike
It’s becoming a protection racket. Why can’t lacross self fund? It’s a more affluent demographic.
At least Fresno St got rid of their AD that cut wrestling and is in the process of restoring it.
LikeLike
Why can’t lacross self fund? It’s a more affluent demographic.
Because it’s probably easier to attract money to keep an existing sport going, than to attract money to create a program from scratch. Not that the latter can’t be done…but it’s harder. And I’ll bet lacrosse is a more expensive sport than wrestling.
LikeLike
Why can’t lacross self fund
My guess, just based off the article, is that the people who would fund lacrosse don’t have a connection to the school.
LikeLike
So it is blackmail.
Butler’s LAX dropped to club status shortly after the AD’s departure…
LikeLike
Mike: “My guess, just based off the article, is that the people who would fund lacrosse don’t have a connection to the school.”
I think that’s it exactly … lacrosse basically self-funds at a number of established blue blood programs, between program revenues and alumni donations, but the kind of school that would start up lacrosse to get the attention of private school graduates it does not receive at the moment, well, they are not in the old boys network (pretty much by definition).
LikeLike
Meaningless internet poll tells me what I want to hear.
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/117468/nebraska-wins-best-big-ten-game-setting-tournament
LikeLike
Big 12 Expansion!
Oklahoma State wrestling coach John Smith said in an interview with the O’Colly that the Big 12, which has had only four teams compete in wrestling the past four seasons, will be adding the six members of the Western Wrestling Conference as members of Big 12 wrestling.
Smith said to expect an official announcement some time within the next month.
Smith spoke with the O’Colly about how the addition of Air Force, North Dakota State, Northern Colorado, South Dakota State, Utah Valley and Wyoming will affect the conference.
http://www.ocolly.com/sports/article_91f937c0-d976-11e4-9029-b38259aa2c03.html
LikeLike
Say what you will about the NDSU athletic department now, but we will be looking back upon them as the originators of “studio football” (Fargodome).
LikeLike
It’ll be interesting to see how that impacts their scheduling. Smith says he’ll still schedule IA, MN and PSU, so I assume they’ll trade these new guys for some of their lesser OOC foes. WV has to be a little upset at all the extra travel that this adds to a non-revenue sport.
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/04/02/bowl-game-host-cities
4 more bowl games? All slots are for the AAC, SB, MWC and CUSA.
LikeLike
I understand the money argument, but are we really about to give 2/3 college football teams bowl games? Many of these games are already costing universities money when they cannot fulfill their portion of the tickets. At what point does that outweigh the TV numbers?
How many sub-.500 teams are we going to see in the postseason this year, and who is really watching them play for that matter?
LikeLike
If all 4 get approved, we’d be up to 43 bowls and thus need 86 teams.
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_eligibility_2014.html
81 teams were eligible last year, and this article lists the rules that would be used to fill the other 5 spots.
Insufficient Number of Deserving Teams
For a period of four years beginning August 2, 2012, if an insufficient number of institutions meet the definition of a “deserving team” to participate in postseason bowl games in a particular year, an institution that meets a condition set forth below shall be eligible to be selected to participate in such a bowl game. A particular bowl game may benefit from this provision only one time within the four-year period. All institutions that meet the first condition must be selected before an institution that meets the second condition may be selected and so forth in descending order:
1. An institution that would have met the FCS Opponent exception but for the fact that one victory was against a FCS opponent that had not averaged 90 percent of the permissible maximum number of grants-in-aid per year in football during a rolling two-year period and the institution’s waiver request was denied.
2. An institution that has won a number of games against FBS opponents and two FCS opponents that together is equal to or greater than the number of its overall losses.
3. An institution that participated in 13 regular season contests and finished the season with a record of six wins and seven losses.
4. An institution that is in its final year of reclassification from the Football Championship Subdivision to the Football Bowl Subdivision and meets the definition of a “deserving team”.
5. An institution that finished its season with a minimum of five wins and a maximum of seven losses but achieved a top-five Academic Progress Rate in the Football Bowl Subdivision for the most recent reporting year.
There were 3 teams that were ineligible due to it being their first year in I-A, so they’d get in (ODU, GA Southern, App. State), I assume. I’m not sure who the final 2 would be. Does a bowl get cancelled if there aren’t enough teams and/or the bowl has already used it’s one waiver?
LikeLike
Whether or not we are ready to do that is yet to be decided.
AFAIR, the MWC had more bowl teams than primary affiliations last year, and CUSA had one bowl eligible school stay at home, with another team at 6-6 who will be bowl eligible this coming year, so it seems likely the Arizona Bowl will get the thumbs up.
I see the logic of the two Sunbelt / the America bowls, one in Orlando, one in Austin, since both conferences sprawl from the southeast coast to Texas. But AFAIU, the American currently has from four to five primary bowl tie-ins. Last season they had six bowl eligible schools, and are adding one more that was bowl eligible last year … so it could be they will not get three primary tie-ins, and one or more of these applications are the American covering their bets (for instance, suppose they were only in on two applications, and one of those were knocked back for some other reason).
LikeLike
So, for those keeping score at home:
Cure Bowl in Orlando, American v Sunbelt, approved
Tuscon, MWC v CUSA … approved
Little Rock, American v Sunbelt … not approved
Austin, American v CUSA … approved except it’s American v Sunbelt
LikeLike
Cincinnati fan here. Most AAC fans I have seen weigh in on the subject want at least one non-football member added. Now that Marshall appears to be safe at Wichita, I say bring ’em on. We need to be getting 4-5 tournament bids annually.
LikeLike
I’m not a daily fantasy player, but this seems a little excessive.
Industry sources said ESPN has agreed to invest hundreds of millions of dollars for up to a 20 percent stake in DraftKings. The major investment will be part of the daily fantasy sports operator’s next round of venture capital financing in May
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/SB-Blogs/On-The-Ground/2015/04/0403-ESPN-DraftKings.aspx
LikeLike
MSU-Duke Is this the most annoying announcing team ever? They never shut up with boring analysis and trivia! I’ve watched most of the first half with the sound off. And TNT; we don’t need constant video coverage of coach K! !@#$%^&*
LikeLike
Dear largeR,
The game is a simulcast on TBS where the great Jim Nance and Bill Raftery provide an enjoyable viewing and listening experience!!!
With 5 minutes left I figure that out! Anyone care to explain the CBS/TBS/TNT coverage of the Final Four? I assumed it would be on CBS only.
Thankyou,
Me
LikeLike
Their coverage really made no sense this year. They’ve pushed a lot of top games off of CBS.
LikeLike
@Brian – Turner (TBS/TNT/truTV) is actually paying significantly more for the NCAA Tournament than CBS. Without the Turner money, CBS would have lost all of the rights to the NCAA Tournament completely to ESPN or Comcast. As a result, part of the deal is that the Turner networks would start showing higher profile games (including the Final Four and National Championship Game) much more frequently.
LikeLike
And CBS still pulls significantly higher ratings. Plenty of people still can’t find truTV, and I’ve seen many people confused by the simulcast on TBS and TNT with different announcers.
At least people know how to find ESPN on their TV.
LikeLike
Yes, that’s true in general for over-the-air versus cable, although the ratings were very high for Saturday’s games. For better or worse, more and more sporting events are migrating to cable because those networks are paying much higher rates fees. That’s only going to accelerate further – the Holy Grail of NFL Playoff games have just started heading that way this year.
LikeLike
I think there were 2 fundamental problems this year:
1. Turner did a bad job explaining what will be on which channel, especially with their version of the megacast of the Final Four. Many people got the UK announcers for the game accidentally because they weren’t aware a neutral broadcast was available elsewhere.
2. Turner channels are harder to find on most systems. At least when ESPN does this most of their networks are grouped together (at least in pairs). That makes it easier to skip from one to another. The Turner channels tend to be spread out and many are unaware of truTV until a sports event is on it. ESPN is better branded.
I happened to disagree with some of their choices about which game to put on which network, but that’s my selfish preference as a fan versus their aim to maximize revenue.
LikeLike
How hard would it be to create a universal remote that allowed you to program – associating the stations you want to a set of numbers you choose? I’m not an engineer but it seems it shouldn’t be too hard. Perhaps a phone app for those with Internet control of their TV.
LikeLike
Some systems let you set up a list of “favorite” channels and you can just surf between them. That can work for a case like this (or NYD bowls back in the day), but you have to know how to do it and you have to reset the list to the normal stations afterwards so nobody gets mad at you.
LikeLike
I watched the Wisconsin-Kentucky game on the channel with the Kentucky homer announcers, and actually found it very entertaining. Obviously they were openly rooting for the Wildcats, as they should, but they were reasonably fair (as homers go) and more knowledgeable than Jim Nantz.
LikeLike
Ncaa basketball refs trying out for the NBA?
LikeLike
Congratulations to WI for beating UK, and thank you!
Duke won at WI in December 80-70. Can WI turn it around this time? It may come down to which team does better from 3.
LikeLike
http://sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2015/04/06/Colleges/Pac12-rights.aspx
PAC12 considering conference controlled radio, signage, etc deal instead of each school signing their own deal with IMG, Learfield, etc.
LikeLike
Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott had been floating the idea with athletic directors and presidents for about six months, but the proposal entered a more formal stage on March 14 at the conference’s basketball tournament in Las Vegas. During a Pac-12 board meeting, presidents voted to initiate a six-month moratorium on any new multimedia rights deals or extensions through mid-September.
That gives the conference office time to study the feasibility of an in-house model for managing and selling multimedia rights across all 12 campuses. The conference will look at traditional multimedia rights in athletics, as well as campuswide marketing assets.
…
Skeptics of Scott’s plan wonder if the schools will turn over their multimedia rights to the conference when the conference-owned channels haven’t performed that well financially and the rights holders are more experienced at monetizing the schools’ rights.
Scott has maintained that the conference is more focused on control of its own property over the long haul versus short-term revenue boosts.
“We’ve been big believers in our members ultimately controlling as much of their rights as possible that will benefit them for the long term,” Scott said. “We’ve seen a significant uplift by continuing to bring more rights to the center and, in the long term, our schools want to control their rights and intellectual property as much as possible.”
…
“We’ve been big believers in our members ultimately controlling as much of their rights as possible that will benefit them for the long term,” Scott said. “We’ve seen a significant uplift by continuing to bring more rights to the center and, in the long term, our schools want to control their rights and intellectual property as much as possible.”
LikeLike
The Bama plan to shut down UAB goes back several years, ex-coach admits.
http://www.underdogdynasty.com/uab-blazers/2015/4/3/8338985/uab-football-shutdown-garrick-mcgee-twitter-dms-2013
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25137763/uab-hires-new-sports-consultant-to-study-cutting-football
UAB has hired yet another consultant to review the decision to cut 3 sports.
LikeLike
Congrats to Duke and Coach K on title #5.
WI made a valiant effort but I think they were just a touch worn down from the UK game. They join the long list of B10 title game losers. They’ll always have that win over UK, though.
On the other hand, Coach K’s fifth title moves him past Adolph Rupp for second place all time. That must make this tournament doubly painful for UK fans.
LikeLike
Brian,
Six, I mean six, BIG teams have lost the title game since 2000…
IU to Maryland
UofI to UNC in one of the worst officiated games in the history of basketball
OSU to Florida
MSU to UNC in a route
MI to Louisville in the second worst officiated game in the history of basketball
Wiscy to Duke last night…
This is a bit of a disturbing trend, but you gotta be there to win, so there is a silver lining to that…
LikeLike
Did you not watch last night? I don’t think the officiating was biased, but it was awful last night. It was awful in Kentucky-Wisconsin as well.
LikeLike
One thing that struck me about the officiating is something I’ve noticed in other games. Wisky was the beneficiary in the first half, Duke was the beneficiary in the second half.
Does the officiating crew work the same spots on the floor throughout the game? So the Wisky defense is at one end in the first half against a stingy ref, and in the second half, the Duke defense benefits?
LikeLike
Bullet,
I did watch the game last night. The officiating was bad, but not biased. In theory, that should affect both teams in an even manner, again, in theory. I thought the UofI game demonstrated biased officiating, which is different.
Duke was not the better team last night, Wiscy was. Having said that, I think Coach K won the mental battle against Bo Ryan. When Wiscy went up 9, they needed to step on Duke’s neck and go for the kill. Instead a freshman, with limited time, came in and saved Duke with his energy and offense. It was on hell of a game.
LikeLike
anthony london,
“Duke was not the better team last night, Wiscy was.”
I disagree. I think Duke was the better team that night. That doesn’t mean Duke was a better team overall, just that night.
“Having said that, I think Coach K won the mental battle against Bo Ryan.”
I consider coaching part of the team, and this is largely why Duke was the better team.
LikeLike
I think there are a couple factors affecting the B1G and its lack of success in the title game:
First, the above teams haven’t gotten any favors in terms of the opponent. In all 6 games, the B1G has faced a number 1 seed. Granted, 3 of those B1G teams were also 1 seeds, but I think the record is different if the B1G faces off against a 3 or 4 seed. Even this year Wisconsin didn’t get any breaks. It faced an 8 seed in the second round, a 4 seed in the sweet sixteen, a 2 seed in the elite 8, and two number 1 seeds in the final four. That is a gauntlet.
Second, the B1G doesn’t really have a blue blood basketball program that can carry the league on its shoulders like Kansas does in the Big 12 or Kentucky does in the SEC. The closest to blue blood status would be Indiana, but I would consider the Hoosiers to be in a tier beneath Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, and UCLA. Even if you consider the Hoosiers to be in the same tier, they certainly haven’t performed like it with only one final four appearance since 1993. Imagine if Duke and UNC combined for two final four appearances in that same span.
Third, every other school with the exception of Indiana, Illinois, Purdue (debatable), and now Maryland (also debatable), is a football school. I think this affects recruiting throughout the league, particularly within the Midwest. In recent years, Kentucky, Kansas, and Duke have all been able to raid Chicago and Indiana for high level talent. The chance to be the so called man at these schools is a big draw to kids who would be second fiddle behind the football program at most B1G schools.
Finally, there is a lack of high level recruiting within the league. Ohio State seems to be the only program able to pull in consistent top 10-15 recruiting classes. It is a testament to the strength of coaches in the league that the B1G has been as strong as it has been the past several years but in basketball more so than any other sport, talent usually wins out. Coaching can only do so much, and I think we’ve seen that in the title games.
LikeLike
“In recent years, Kentucky, Kansas, and Duke have all been able to raid Chicago and Indiana for high level talent. The chance to be the so called man at these schools is a big draw to kids who would be second fiddle behind the football program at most B1G schools.”
How much do you think other schools’ presence and proximity to the Midwest have affected recruiting, too? Half of the Big East is now in the Midwest: Xavier in Cincy, Butler in Indy, DePaul in Chicago, Marquette in Milwaukee, and Creighton in Omaha. Then there’s two now-ACC schools bascially at the north and south ends of Indiana: Notre Dame, and then Louisville just south of the border. Cincinnati is in B1G territory. So is Pitt. WVU just south of the PA border and a short drive from Ohio. It just seems like there is a lot more competition within the Midwest from traditionally strong programs.
Contrast that to the Big 12. In Texas, as in the Midwest, there are schools from well outside the region who recruit there successfully. Duke had two or three starters from Texas, IIRC. But there aren’t many other programs to deal with. Texas has A&M, and as of late, there’s Brown-led SMU and Sampson-led Houston (who knows how that’ll pan out). In Oklahoma there’s Tulsa, in Kansas there’s Wichita State, and in Iowa there’s Northern Iowa. That’s a lot less to deal with than the major programs in and surrounding the Big Ten’s territory. And the Pac-12, well, all they have out west are Gonzaga, BYU, San Diego State, New Mexico, and the occassional St. Mary’s and other surging MWC program.
On the other hand, the Pac-12 and Big 12 are in similar national title droughts, although they have even fewer title game appearances. Big 12 members have won only two national championships since 1959 (KU in ’88 and ’08). The Pac-12 has won two national titles in the past 40 years (UCLA ’95, Arizona ’97). Truth is that the national championship has been dominated in the past 25 years by Duke (5), UConn (4), UNC (3), Kentucky (3), and Florida (2).
LikeLike
@Michael in Raleigh – At a macro-level, basketball recruiting is much more nationalized compared to football, with Kentucky, Kansas, Duke and UNC in particular completely dominating getting the elite recruits. Here’s an article from the Chicago Tribune last week about McDonald’s All-Americans from Chicago and virtually everywhere else in the country choosing to leave home:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/highschool/ct-spt-0331-prep-basketball-mcdonalds-leaving-home-20150330-story.html
Some stats from that article: 29.4% of all McDonald’s All-Americans since 1990, 31.9% since 2000 and 32.3% since 2006 (the start of the current one-and-done era) have gone to either Kentucky, Kansas, Duke or UNC. Those 4 schools specifically are on a completely different recruiting playing field compared to the rest of the country.
In the case of Chicago recruiting at a micro level, Kentucky, Kansas and Duke all have extremely strong direct ties to the city even beyond their national reputations. Worldwide Wes (John Calipari’s biggest feeder of talent for years) is Chicago-based, Bill Self built up strong Chicago ties when he was the coach at Illinois, and Coach K is a Chicago native. So, those 3 schools aren’t even just relying upon their national cache to get Chicago area recruits – to top basketball recruits, they are as “local” in terms of their connections and presence as any in-state or Big Ten coach. It’s a problem that I know all too well as an Illini guy.
LikeLike
Wow. Those are amazing numbers. Sounds like Kansas is underperforming and UConn is doing quite a job.
Recruiting in basketball has become more national. Kentucky would always get some players from around the country, but nearly half the team would be Kentucky players. Now usually the only Kentucky players are the walk-ons.
Looked up the 78 national champs-Kentucky’s top 6 included 2 Lexington players, 2 from Ohio, 1 from Indiana and 1 from Louisiana. The rest of the team included 3 KY players, 1 CT, 1 TN, 1 IL, 2 CO. 5 out of 14 from KY and 10/14 from KY and surrounding states.
2015 had 2 from California, 2 from Texas, 2 from NJ, 1 MI, 1 OH, 1 MA, 1 KS, 1 TN, 1 IN, 1NY, 3 KY. None of the 3 Kentucky players was in the 10 man rotation. So that’s 3 of 16 from KY and 6/16 from KY and surrounding states.
I would guess North Carolina and Kansas are following the same pattern.
LikeLike
anthony london,
“Six, I mean six, BIG teams have lost the title game since 2000…”
I think the better team won in most of those games if not all of them. It’s a bit disheartening, but you have to be in it to win it. Eventually one of our teams will get over the hump. I think it’s sort of like where football was for a while. What we really need is one more elite coach to help push teams to improve.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25139160/b12-acc-get-their-way-championship-game-restrictions-to-be-relaxed-by-2016
Legislation allowing for the deregulation of conference championship games is now expected to be passed by 2016, CBSSports.com has learned.
The move would directly impact the Big 12 and ACC, which developed the legislation. The Big 12, which is the only Power Five league without a championship game, is merely seeking the option of staging such a contest with 10 teams. The ACC’s ultimate intentions with a 14-team league in football, one which already holds a championship game, are not clear.
LikeLike
Much easier now for the ACC to add UConn for an even 16. Notre Dame could play one of the three five team divisions each year. The addition of UConn’s market might boost ESPN’s confidence in an ACCN just enough to actually launch it.
LikeLike
Notre Dame could play one of the three five team divisions each year
Just to be clear, I’m talking about ND football which is still independent.
LikeLike
Not a done deal yet, but it certainly seems to be trending in that direction. (Long-time FTT readers will recall that I have long argued that the NCAA both would and should do this.)
The article mentions a “belief that the ACC would [split into] three divisions, have the two highest ranked play in the postseason.” That’s Bob Bowlsby speaking. I don’t recall anyone in the ACC floating that idea publicly, so it must be back-room chatter at athletic executive meetings.
LikeLike
Long-time FTT readers will recall that I have long argued that the NCAA both would and should do this
The round robin rule has been one of the few limits to expansion. I’m surprised this is going through with out a fight from opponents of P5 expansion.
LikeLike
Is it an autonomy issue, such that non-P5 schools wouldn’t have a say in the matter?
LikeLike
It shouldn’t be since the rule change would impact all levels.
LikeLike
The round robin rule has been one of the few limits to expansion.
I certainly think the current rule is an annoyance, but as far as I can tell, it hasn’t stood in the way of anyone doing what they really wanted to do, if there was enough money to be made.
I’m surprised this is going through with out a fight from opponents of P5 expansion.
All of the P5 conferences know they might want to expand again, at some point. None of the mid-majors dare stand in their way.
Indeed, even without expanding, some leagues might choose to abandon their divisions, once they are allowed to select their CCG participants any way they want. I don’t expect the Big Ten to leap into anything precipitously, but it does solve certain problems, and allow traditional rivalries to be played more often.
LikeLike
I certainly think the current rule is an annoyance, but as far as I can tell, it hasn’t stood in the way of anyone doing what they really wanted to do, if there was enough money to be made.
The multiple concerns raised with round robin play problems are an indicator that its a limiting factor. I would argue it caused the Big Ten to go to nine conference games. Expand too far and the cross division teams end up feeling like OOC games.
All of the P5 conferences know they might want to expand again, at some point. None of the mid-majors dare stand in their way.
Any mid majors that aren’t first in line for a promotion should be working to block P5 expansion until they are confident they are first line. Additional P5 expansion will only make it more difficult to be promoted.
LikeLike
I certainly think the current rule is an annoyance, but as far as I can tell, it hasn’t stood in the way of anyone doing what they really wanted to do, if there was enough money to be made.
The multiple concerns raised with round robin play problems are an indicator that its a limiting factor. I would argue it caused the Big Ten to go to nine conference games. Expand too far and the cross division teams end up feeling like OOC games.
Try to find even one case, where an expansion that a conference was otherwise willing to do, was derailed for that reason. Find even a rumor of one. I am pretty sure you can’t.
The Big Ten was seriously considering a move to nine conference games even before it added Maryland and Rutgers. It was gonna happen anyway.
Any mid majors that aren’t first in line for a promotion should be working to block P5 expansion until they are confident they are first line. Additional P5 expansion will only make it more difficult to be promoted.
The mid-majors are powerless to stop it. And even if they could come up with a way, all they’d do is push the P5 towards further autonomy. Remember, the mid-majors blocked full cost-of-attendance scholarships a few years ago, but their victory was short-lived. I think they now realize that they can’t stop the P5 from doing anything they really want, and to try is counter-productive.
LikeLike
Let’s be clear. It wasn’t the G5 that blocked full cost. It was FCS and non-football who blocked it.
LikeLike
“Any mid majors that aren’t first in line for a promotion should be working to block P5 expansion until they are confident they are first line. Additional P5 expansion will only make it more difficult to be promoted.”
That would be among those G5 schools angling for “promotion”. If schools in a conference are confident that their conference is unlikely to be raided, it might not be an issue either way, in which case going along to get along likely makes a lot of sense in the long term.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
>>I certainly think the current rule is an annoyance, but as far as I can tell, it hasn’t stood in the >>way of anyone doing what they really wanted to do, if there was enough money to be made.
>The multiple concerns raised with round robin play problems are an indicator that its a limiting >factor. I would argue it caused the Big Ten to go to nine conference games. Expand too far and >the cross division teams end up feeling like OOC games.
Try to find even one case, where an expansion that a conference was otherwise willing to do, was derailed for that reason. Find even a rumor of one. I am pretty sure you can’t.
It’s really hard to show why people didn’t do something.
Would one or more of the P5 be at 16 teams if round robin play wasn’t required? Especially with the resistance to a 9th conference game in some leagues, RR play may well be a limiting factor.
If we take the larger rule into consideration, would the B12 be at 11+ teams by now if you didn’t need 12 for a CCG? What if they just didn’t need to lose games in TX by playing RR? Would expansion have gone differently if conferences didn’t have to add pairs of teams? Would the B10 have added NE and MO if that didn’t create a scheduling dilemma? Might the SEC have 13 teams? Might the ACC have 15?
>The Big Ten was seriously considering a move to nine conference games even before it added >Maryland and Rutgers. It was gonna happen anyway.
Since we almost had the B10/P12 agreement, I’ve got to side with Marc here.
LikeLike
Try to find even one case, where an expansion that a conference was otherwise willing to do, was derailed for that reason. Find even a rumor of one. I am pretty sure you can’t.
In addition to what Brian said, I’ll point out that I said it was *one* of the limiting factors not *the* limiting factor. I think you would agree that:
* Big 12 teams not in Texas, don’t want to play in Texas any less than they do now.
* PAC12 teams not in California, don’t want to play in California any less than they do now.
* Big Ten teams have tons of very important trophy games
* The SEC has lots of important rivalries that must be preserved.
Any expansion discussions by those conferences have to address those problems with their membership. Without the round robin those problems just got much easier to address.
The Big Ten was seriously considering a move to nine conference games even before it added Maryland and Rutgers. It was gonna happen anyway.
Quite possible. However, when they justified the change by saying it was (1) for the playoff and (2) for members to see each other more often.
LikeLike
That would be among those G5 schools angling for “promotion”. If schools in a conference are confident that their conference is unlikely to be raided, it might not be an issue either way, in which case going along to get along likely makes a lot of sense in the long term.
Any further P5 expansion with G5 teams is only going to hurt the remaining G5 members. MAC teams may not have any desire to be promoted, but a widened divide between the P5 and G5 would still cause a loss of prestige and very likely rights fees. The G5 needs to be very wary of letting the gap between the P5 and G5 become as big as the perceived gap between FCS and FBS is today.
LikeLike
Marc:
If this happens it would seem you were right and I was wrong. It would apear I have underestimated the seductive power of selection by subjective criteria. Let’s just cancel the televising the season and have weekly polls and dramatic espn selection shows weekly, and end with all knowing eye testers and future seerers justifying why a team that couldn’t win it’s division gets a do over. That is where the power would be, not in on field season results.
My faith in college athletics is dropping fast, and approaching WWE levels.
LikeLike
Mike,
“I think there’s some belief that ACC would play three divisions, have two highest ranked play in postseason,” said Bob Bowlsby, chairman of the new NCAA Football Oversight Committee.
Really? Divisions of 5, 5 and 4 with ND games rotating around or 5, 5, and 5? 4 division games versus 4 crossover games?
“This isn’t really changing the rule, it’s deregulating,” Bowlsby said.
That may the most nonsensical thing I’ve ever seen. Deregulating is the very definition of changing the rule.
If it does pass in 2016, I’ll be curious to see if anyone drops divisions right away.
LikeLike
I think there will be a lot of pressure to drop divisions. Lock a few important opponents for each team and then everyone gets to see the rest of the conference more frequently. It should improve the quality of the CCG’s in years the divisions aren’t balanced.
LikeLike
I’d certainly prefer to see the B10 drop divisions (and the CCG, but that ain’t happening). Nobody but PSU should be forced to play RU and UMD every year.
14 teams and 9 games means playing all but 4 teams each year.
There are several choices of how to do it.
A. Lock the same number of game for everyone.
This is the simplest approach and easiest for fans to understand, but you’ll either end up locking games that aren’t rivalries or you’ll miss locking some rivalries. I still think this is the approach the B10 would use.
A1. lock 2, play 7 of 11 – 2 is not enough to keep the necessary rivalries
A2. lock 3, play 6 of 10 – 3 is about the ideal number
A3. lock 4, play 5 of 9 – 4 is starting to lock too many
A4. lock 5, play 4 of 8 – 5 locks unneeded games but makes for easy math (simple for fans)
I’d guess the B10 locks either 3 or 5 if they do this.
B. Lock the actual rivalries and let the chips fall where they may
This is a pain for schedulers and fans, but would minimize locking faux rivalries. At least 1 person supports this plan vigorously.
What 3 locked opponents might look like:
RU – UMD, PSU, IN
UMD – RU, PSU, PU
PSU – RU, UMD, OSU
OSU – MI, IL, PSU
MI – OSU, MSU, NW
MSU – MI, NW, IN
IN – PU, MSU, RU
PU – IN, IL, UMD
IL – NW, PU, OSU
NW – IL, MSU, MI
WI – IA, NE, MN
MN – IA, WI, NE
IA – WI, MN, NE
NE – WI, IA, MN
Lose – MI/MN
Faux rivals – RU/IN, UMD/PU, MI/NW
What 5 locked opponents might look like:
RU – UMD, PSU, MI, NW, IA
UMD – RU, PSU, OSU, UMD, WI
PSU – RU, UMD, OSU, NE, PU
OSU – MI, IL, PSU, UMD, IN
MI – OSU, MSU, MN, RU, NE
MSU – MI, NW, IN, WI, MN
IN – PU, MSU, NW, IL, OSU
PU – IN, IL, NW, UMD, PSU
IL – NW, PU, OSU, IN, IA
NW – IL, MSU, RU, IN, PU
WI – IA, NE, MN, MSU, UMD
MN – IA, WI, NE, MI, MSU
IA – WI, MN, NE, IL, RU
NE – WI, IA, MN, PSU, MI
Faux rivals – several
But it does part of what the B10 wanted divisions to do, which is bringing major brands in to NYC and DC regularly.
LikeLike
B. Lock the actual rivalries and let the chips fall where they may
This is a pain for schedulers and fans, but would minimize locking faux rivalries. At least 1 person supports this plan vigorously.
Brian is probably referring to me. I think that schedulers who are paid good money to do this as a full-time job, would have no trouble dealing with a different number of locked games per team.
There are enough fans, that it’s hard to attribute a particular view to anything but a sliver of them. In the current division system, each team gets three cross-divisional games per year, and most people have no idea how those games are picked. I don’t think the league has ever actually explained it. Most fans just get a schedule, and say, “So, that’s who we’re playing this year.” They don’t actually want or need to know where those games come from.
Erstwhile FTT poster Richard wrote several long posts describing something like a 36-year rotation of cross-divisional games. After the Big Ten published several years’ worth of future schedules, Richard claimed with satisfaction that he’d been proved right—supposedly. But there aren’t many Richards. To most fans, the schedule simply is what it is. Except, of course, for the minority of nutcases who think it’s a conspiracy by Jim Delany and Mark Rudner to hand the title to Ohio State.
So, I think it’s a small minority of fans, who:
1) Would care that deeply about the schedule (as long as the main rivals are on it); and,
2) Are too dim-witted to understand that the alternative to unequal locking is to create a bunch of faux rivalries no one really wants; and,
3) Can’t find anyone smart enough to explain it to them.
LikeLike
I tend to think the schedule solution is to allow TV to crate X matchups happen in partnership with the league and let the ADs sort out the rest.
LikeLike
On the locked five or three question, it would be perfectly possible to draw up a locked five four year rotation … home and away, then swap the “4 of 8” teams … and then rotate the ‘faux-rivals’ around for the next four year block. Since a pair of schools are involved in any “long run locked” rivals, there should always be the right number of schools to play ring around the rosie with the faux-locked schools.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
>>B. Lock the actual rivalries and let the chips fall where they may
>>
>>This is a pain for schedulers and fans, but would minimize locking faux rivalries. At least 1 >>person supports this plan vigorously.
>Brian is probably referring to me. I think that schedulers who are paid good money to do this as >a full-time job, would have no trouble dealing with a different number of locked games per team.
I think you underestimate the PITA factor of scheduling. First, I’m not sure how many conferences have a full-time scheduler as opposed to someone who includes scheduling as part of their duties. You have to work around already-scheduled OOC games, avoid any other proscribed dates for certain stadiums, maintain traditional rivalry dates, balance home and away, rotate teams, not give any 1 school advantageous treatment, and then follow other conference rules. Based on the end results we see every year, it’s harder than it looks. This is a problem that professors specialize in and write books about.
>There are enough fans, that it’s hard to attribute a particular view to anything but a sliver of >them.
I disagree. I think you can talk about large chunks of them.
>In the current division system, each team gets three cross-divisional games per year, and most >people have no idea how those games are picked. I don’t think the league has ever actually >explained it. Most fans just get a schedule, and say, “So, that’s who we’re playing this year.” >They don’t actually want or need to know where those games come from.
Fans know they rotate equally and don’t much care beyond that. But they do care about when they play certain teams, and a regular schedule helps with that. You know you’ll see your rival at home every even-numbered year (or odd). You can make plans around that. Being able to tell fans you’ll see a team at home either every other year or every 4 years is simple. The B10 doesn’t explain things now for two reasons:
1. They don’t have to.
2. It’s complicated.
Note that the B10 still refuses to explain parity-based scheduling despite it being the guiding principle for the next 36 seasons (if nothing changes). We had to figure it out on our own as fans, and very few people have the time and energy to do that.
>To most fans, the schedule simply is what it is.
Yes and no. They don’t get upset about what it is, but most fans like to be able to plan in advance for things. They aren’t going to expend much mental energy on it, though.
>Except, of course, for the minority of nutcases who think it’s a conspiracy by Jim Delany and >Mark Rudner to hand the title to Ohio State.
Many do get upset that their rival got an easier schedule than they did, though. Or that they never seem to play school X. Or how convenient that Y skips both OSU and MI while someone else gets both.
>2) Are too dim-witted to understand that the alternative to unequal locking is to create a bunch of faux rivalries no one really wants; and,
That’s a huge assumption. You just said most people don’t really care, but now “no one really wants” these games locked. If they don’t care, then what’s the problem? Because many people do care about locking most of those games. And for some of the other games, the B10 cares about locking them. Telling everyone they have 5 (or 3, or whatever) locked games with the rest rotating is much simpler and it sounds fair to everyone.
LikeLike
Arkstfan,
“I tend to think the schedule solution is to allow TV to crate X matchups happen in partnership with the league and let the ADs sort out the rest.”
1. TV would have to pay a ton of money to get that power. Why else would the conferences be willing to sacrifice that much control?
2. TV control would be a disaster. They’d pair all the top brands and all the bottom brands. The best schools would have killer schedules that almost guarantee multiple losses each season and the lesser brands would never face a big brand. All the schools would hate it.
3. The ADs want nothing to do with having to schedule their conference games. Everyone wants the conference office to handle that. That at least makes sure schools can’t collude.
LikeLike
The value of that control is why it is worth pursuing. You go into this trying to maximize income. The SEC had AD’s making conference schedules until Arkansas and South Carolina entered, that loss of control is what led to the creation of the designated crossover games (later game). The idea that top and bottom schools would never meet ignores that AD’s would control half the schedule which is more than they control now.
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“On the locked five or three question, it would be perfectly possible to draw up a locked five four year rotation … home and away, then swap the “4 of 8″ teams … and then rotate the ‘faux-rivals’ around for the next four year block.”
Sure. I just gave a quick example of what it might be. You wouldn’t have to keep the same 5 locked forever.
“Since a pair of schools are involved in any “long run locked” rivals, there should always be the right number of schools to play ring around the rosie with the faux-locked schools.”
Usually, yes. Sometimes it comes back to 2 teams each looking for 2 games if you aren’t careful, though.
What 5 locked opponents might look like:
RU – UMD, PSU, MI, NW, IA
UMD – RU, PSU, OSU, WI, PU
PSU – RU, UMD, OSU, NE, PU
OSU – MI, IL, PSU, UMD, IN
MI – OSU, MSU, MN, RU, NE
MSU – MI, NW, IN, WI, MN
IN – PU, MSU, NW, IL, OSU
PU – IN, IL, NW, UMD, PSU
IL – NW, PU, OSU, IN, IA
NW – IL, MSU, RU, IN, PU
WI – IA, NE, MN, MSU, UMD
MN – IA, WI, NE, MI, MSU
IA – WI, MN, NE, IL, RU
NE – WI, IA, MN, PSU, MI
Faux rivals – several
But it does part of what the B10 wanted divisions to do, which is bringing major brands in to NYC and DC regularly.
Rivalries (true rivals, geographic rivals, one-sided rivals, trophy games, wanted by fans, etc):
RU – UMD, PSU
UMD – RU, PSU
PSU – RU, UMD, OSU, NE
OSU – MI, IL, PSU
MI – OSU, MSU, MN
MSU – MI, NW, IN, WI
IN – PU, MSU, IL
PU – IN, IL
IL – NW, PU, OSU, IN, IA
NW – IL, MSU
WI – IA, NE, MN, MSU
MN – IA, WI, NE, MI
IA – WI, MN, NE
NE – WI, IA, MN, PSU
I’m not claiming all those games are vital, but they are real rivalries of one sort or another. In addition, there are some other compelling reasons for certain other games I locked.
Games to make all the kings lock 2 others (good for TV and balance):
MI – NE
Games to bring big brands into NYC and DC:
RU – MI, IA
UMD – OSU, WI
Games to get almost everyone 1 locked king (I accidentally didn’t get one for NW):
IN – OSU
PU – PSU
Games just to fill out the locked 5:
RU – NW (NYC vs Chicago, plus NW has lots of alumni in NYC and wants the exposure there)
IN – NW (proximity)
PU – NW (proximity)
UMD – PU (2 good engineering schools)
MSU – MN (all that was left)
LikeLike
““Since a pair of schools are involved in any “long run locked” rivals, there should always be the right number of schools to play ring around the rosie with the faux-locked schools.”
Usually, yes. Sometimes it comes back to 2 teams each looking for 2 games if you aren’t careful, though.”
Yes … the fact that there are the right number of schools to set up the various ring around the rosies just assures that it can be done if you are careful, not that it will always work out if you set out to do it willy-nilly. But it would be professionals doing it, I reckon they can do it carefully.
But if the Buckeyes see everyone twice in four years, and plays TSUN every year, I wouldn’t be stressed very much how they sort out the rest.
LikeLike
It ought to be something like this for the ACC:
Everyone in the league has three teams that they play every year. Each school would play five of the remaining ten opponents for two years. Those five would then rotate off, and the remaining five opponents would be played for the next two years. As a result, every team plays every other team in the conference at least twice every four years.
The teams with the two best in-league records would play each other at the end of the season. Obviously there would have to be some sort of tiebreaker when two teams tie for second at 7-1 or 6-2 or whatever.
I think these are the most likely teams each school would play annually:
Miami: FSU, Virginia Tech, Boston College
FSU: Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson
Georgia Tech: FSU, Clemson, Louisville
Clemson: FSU, Georgia Tech, NC State
Wake Forest: Duke, NC State, Syracuse
Duke: Wake Forest, UNC, Virginia
UNC: Duke, NC State, Virginia
NC State: Clemson, Wake Forest, UNC
Virginia Tech: Miami, Virginia, Louisville
Virginia: Duke, UNC, Virginia Tech
Louisville: Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Pitt
Pitt: Louisville, Syracuse, Boston College
Syracuse: Wake Forest, Pitt, Boston College
Boston College: Miami, Pitt, Syracuse
________________
If I’m UConn or Cincinnati, I’m desperately hoping that the ACC goes with the three divisions of five teams idea that Bowlsby referred to instead of my idea. And I’m really hopeful, especially, for that fifteenth team to be my school and not the other.
LikeLike
http://hamptonroads.com/2013/06/admittedly-impractical-suggestion-solving-accs-football-scheduling-problem
A VT beat writer came up with this 2 years ago:
Boston College — Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia
Clemson — Florida State, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
Duke — Miami, North Carolina, Wake Forest
Florida State — Clemson, Miami, N.C. State
Georgia Tech — Clemson, Miami, N.C. State
Louisville — Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia Tech
Miami — Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech
North Carolina — Duke, N.C. State, Virginia
N.C. State — Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina
Pittsburgh — Boston College, Louisville, Syracuse
Syracuse — Boston College, Louisville, Pittsburgh
Virginia — Boston College, North Carolina, Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech — Louisville, Virginia, Wake Forest
Wake Forest — Clemson, Duke, Virginia Tech
LikeLike
Georgia Tech will tell you its UNC, Duke and UVA they want to play.
LikeLike
Actually, Clemson and VT tend to be the 2 biggest ACC rivalries for GT. UVA was one for a while, and FSU always gets people excited.
LikeLike
@Brian,
I can’t cite you a source, but I do remember reading something where the president of Georgia Tech said something about how GT desires affiliation with UNC, Duke, and UVA. This was news at the time because there was speculation that the Big Ten could expand with ACC schools beyond Maryland. People translated his quote as an implication that GT would go where those three go (if they could help it). Anyway, that is where bullet’s point comes from.
For on the field rivalries, I agree that Clemson and Virginia Tech are probably the hottest tickets in the conference. I think Florida State could be added to that list due to Tallahassee’s relative proximity to Atlanta and their shared identity as “football schools” in a league with “basketball league” reputation.
LikeLike
Michael in Raleigh,
“I can’t cite you a source, but I do remember reading something where the president of Georgia Tech said something about how GT desires affiliation with UNC, Duke, and UVA.”
As schools, yes. I was just talking football rivalries. GT will be affiliated with them whether they are locked football rivals or not.
“For on the field rivalries, I agree that Clemson and Virginia Tech are probably the hottest tickets in the conference.”
Clemson and GT have a long history pre-dating the ACC (in the Southern Conference together). In addition, they are quite close together (124 miles). VT was also in the SoCon for a while, and then GT and VT have won all the Coastal Division titles except 1 for Duke.
LikeLike
I do remember reading something where the president of Georgia Tech said something about how GT desires affiliation with UNC, Duke, and UVA.
This was a reference to academic affiliation: it’s no coincidence that those are the ACC’s four AAU schools. That doesn’t mean GT particularly desires an annual football game with those teams.
LikeLike
Random thoughts:
1. I’ve been guessing this would pass since autonomy came into being. Getting this through the wider NCAA was troublesome as there are so many difference circumstances they have to deal with, but the Power 5 conferences themselves will generally support each other as long it’s not something directly effecting them in a negative way.
2. The Big 12 will talk about seriously examining whether they really want a CCG and I hope they don’t add one (love the traditional set-up). That said, it will be mostly talk. They’ll add one the first year they are allowed.
3. The ACC will examine 3 divisions, but my guess is they decide against it. They will instead end complete round robin play in division by having each school miss one in division game and adding an extra crossover.
4. No one will drop divisions completely. I wish they would, but they do not want extra controversy with who goes to the CCG and they’ll worry about that.
LikeLike
5. Notre Dame fans and powerful alumni actively do not want to competing for any conference title. They do not want the possibility of playing in the ACC Championship regardless of whether that means extra ACC games or not. Nothing in this will push Notre Dame toward conference membership.
6. If the ACC goes to 3 divisions, it will still be 14 teams. The math works fine to have 2 divisions of 5 and 1 of 4. You’ll play your division mates and 2 each from the other divisions (3 and 2 if your in the 4 team division). One division being smaller makes zero difference in competitive balance as there will still be 8 conference games and one division winner will be left out every year.
LikeLike
Dropping a full round robin from a division structure is just as controversy-prone as dumping divisions altogether. IMO the ACC’s primary resistance to killing off divisions is that they don’t want to admit that they screwed up alignment in the first place. The B1G overcame this resistance; it remains to be seen whether the ACC can do so as well.
LikeLike
IMO the ACC’s primary resistance to killing off divisions is that they don’t want to admit that they screwed up alignment in the first place.
I don’t think they’ll have any trouble admitting that. A number ACC athletics executives have stated publicly that the current system forces them into scheduling compromises they strongly dislike. They and the Big XII have been the strongest proponents for this rule change, and the most vocal that they’ll take advantage once they’re allowed to.
Anyhow, no such admission is really required. Under the current rule, I am not sure they could have done better: breaking a 14-team league into static divisions entails compromises, no matter how you go about it. And with the ACC facing other existential threats, staying at 12 wouldn’t have been a good idea either.
LikeLike
On a side note, what does this news mean to BYU? The B12 won’t need to expand to get a CCG, so is BYU’s P5 dream over? Do they ever tire of independence and go back to the MWC?
LikeLike
Actually, this rule change could make it easier for BYU to get into the Big XII.
Today, if the Big XII wants to expand, it has two problems. First, it needs a partner for BYU, and there is no financially compelling 12th school that would accept an invite. With CCG de-regulation, adding just BYU becomes a possibility.
The second problem is scheduling. When the Big XII had 12 schools, the Texas and Oklahoma schools were in the same division. This made the divisions extremely unbalanced. The South division won the game in 11 out of 15 years that it was played. The four years the North won it, the champion was either Nebraska or Colorado, neither of which is in the league anymore. In 12 of 15 years, the North representative was Nebraska, Colorado, or Missouri, and they’re all gone.
So clearly a north-south split wouldn’t work with the current membership and any likely 11th & 12th members. But any other split would break up annual rivalries that no one wants to lose, unless the benefits (that is, the dollars) are extremely compelling. Beyond that, every current Big XII member gets two games in Texas every year, which is helpful for recruiting. No matter how you do it, someone gets less access to Texas, and you have to make it worth their while.
For the Big XII, with their peculiar Texas/Okalahoma geography, the scheduling problem is a lot easier if they can have a CCG without having to split into divisions.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“Today, if the Big XII wants to expand, it has two problems. First, it needs a partner for BYU, and there is no financially compelling 12th school that would accept an invite. With CCG de-regulation, adding just BYU becomes a possibility.”
But with deregulation, the B12 doesn’t need to expand to get a CCG. Does BYU bring enough to the table to justify expansion for expansion’s sake?
“The second problem is scheduling. When the Big XII had 12 schools, the Texas and Oklahoma schools were in the same division. This made the divisions extremely unbalanced. The South division won the game in 11 out of 15 years that it was played. The four years the North won it, the champion was either Nebraska or Colorado, neither of which is in the league anymore. In 12 of 15 years, the North representative was Nebraska, Colorado, or Missouri, and they’re all gone.
So clearly a north-south split wouldn’t work with the current membership and any likely 11th & 12th members. But any other split would break up annual rivalries that no one wants to lose, unless the benefits (that is, the dollars) are extremely compelling. Beyond that, every current Big XII member gets two games in Texas every year, which is helpful for recruiting. No matter how you do it, someone gets less access to Texas, and you have to make it worth their while.
For the Big XII, with their peculiar Texas/Okalahoma geography, the scheduling problem is a lot easier if they can have a CCG without having to split into divisions.”
But any games against BYU will be fewer games in TX. Where’s the incentive to add BYU? Do they really add significantly more than $20M to the TV deal?
LikeLike
But any games against BYU will be fewer games in TX. Where’s the incentive to add BYU? Do they really add significantly more than $20M to the TV deal?
Oh, I’m not saying BYU is headed to the Big XII. I’m just saying that as long as expansion has to occur in pairs, any school that comes with BYU is going to drag the average down, and bring fairly acute scheduling issues. This rule give BYU more of a shot, although it might still not be enough.
LikeLike
@Brian – I’m not sure if it means that the Big 12 dream is over for BYU, but I’m fairly certain that they’re not ever willingly heading back to the MWC or any other G5 conference. Independence at least allows BYU to argue that it’s special or a quasi-power school, whereas joining a G5 league cements lower tier status. The SEC and ACC have both cited BYU as meeting those leagues’ non-conference power school scheduling requirements, which is great for the school’s perception and something that wouldn’t occur in a G5 conference.
LikeLike
BYU couldn’t extract acceptable terms (from their point of view) from the B12 even as the B12 faced possible collapse. Why would the B12 relent now, and why would the LDS leadership change their position on those previously objected to requirements?
LikeLike
Frank the Tank,
“Brian – I’m not sure if it means that the Big 12 dream is over for BYU, but I’m fairly certain that they’re not ever willingly heading back to the MWC or any other G5 conference. Independence at least allows BYU to argue that it’s special or a quasi-power school, whereas joining a G5 league cements lower tier status. The SEC and ACC have both cited BYU as meeting those leagues’ non-conference power school scheduling requirements, which is great for the school’s perception and something that wouldn’t occur in a G5 conference.”
That’s all true, and I know the LDS leadership is making this decision and not the AD. I just wonder if at some point scheduling 12 games becomes hard enough for them to give in. Or if their lack of NY6 access even in really good years drives them to join a G5 just for the shot at a major bowl again.
LikeLike
Their relative lack of NY6 bowl access outside the G5 versus inside depends on how often they would be the best G5 champion. It might take a couple of years where BYU convinces itself that it would have been the best G5 champion before that issue gains traction.
Where the difficulty of scheduling 12 games kicks in the hardest is toward the end of the season. So if the difficulty increases, or the LDS is disapointed with the profile of the games it is able to land, its possible that a 4 game late season scheduling agreement with a G5 conference could be enough reduction in difficulty to allow them to remain independent.
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“Their relative lack of NY6 bowl access outside the G5 versus inside depends on how often they would be the best G5 champion. It might take a couple of years where BYU convinces itself that it would have been the best G5 champion before that issue gains traction.”
Probably, but it seems pretty clear on paper. Which is easier:
1. Make the top 10 (probably top 8 to be sure)
2. Be better than the champs of the MAC, SB, CUSA and AAC
“Where the difficulty of scheduling 12 games kicks in the hardest is toward the end of the season. So if the difficulty increases, or the LDS is disapointed with the profile of the games it is able to land, its possible that a 4 game late season scheduling agreement with a G5 conference could be enough reduction in difficulty to allow them to remain independent.”
The most likely G5 to agree to that based on geography would be the MWC, but why would they settle for that to help BYU out? Would other G5s agree to travel to BYU in November to also get BYU at home in November? I don’t know. That disrupts conference schedules, but BYU is a big name for them and might bring enough money to justify it.
LikeLike
“Probably, but it seems pretty clear on paper. Which is easier:
1. Make the top 10 (probably top 8 to be sure)
2. Be better than the champs of the MAC, SB, CUSA and AAC”
If both are expected to be close to zero chance, which one is closer to zero could be a moot point. If the LDS is convinced that the BYU team of that year could have been at a NY6 as a G5 member, but was locked out as an independent, then that could shift opinions. Talking up the possibility of getting into the P5 would be one way to put that kind of thinking on the back burner.
“The most likely G5 to agree to that based on geography would be the MWC, but why would they settle for that to help BYU out?”
I don’t reckon they would. It could well be the hardest exactly because it would make so much sense.
“Would other G5s agree to travel to BYU in November to also get BYU at home in November? I don’t know. That disrupts conference schedules, but BYU is a big name for them and might bring enough money to justify it.”
The Sunbelt has an odd number of FB teams, so they have at least one hole in their round-robin. And I guess CUSA will have an odd number of teams in FB as well, with UAB dropping FB. Either hole could well be temporary (Sunbelt telling Idaho to toddle along when the term of the affiliation agreement expires, or CUSA finding a school they want to replace UAB), but if CCG deregulation makes scheduling for an odd number of schools easier, then maybe one or both won’t be in such a hurry. And there are CUSA schools that would be swayed if there were a few BBall games on offer as a sweetener.
LikeLike
Frank the Tank Readers,
Take a moment with me to look back at 2010, when the series of conference realignment first got really going. For all we knew, the Big 12 was about to be completely picked apart. Six teams (the south division, minus Baylor, plus Colorado) were thought to be headed to a vastly expanded Pac-16. Meanwhile, the Big Ten was expected to pick up Missouri and/or Nebraska.
In college basketball circles, the most mind-boggling result could have been that Kansas, who is truly one of the sport’s true blue bloods, would be left without a conference home. The back-up plan was supposedly the Big East, but that conference, too, was sure to be threatened by a raid from the ACC and/or Big Ten.
Today, of course, the Big 12 looks very different, but KU’s conference home is secure, at least until the Big 12’s GOR expires in ten years or so.
Five years later, has anyone noticed that while Kansas is safe, a different blue blood has instead been left without a truly secure conference home: UConn. Sure, I know UConn is thought of as a “new blood.” They still don’t get mentioned alongside those six always listed at the top (in alphabetical order): Duke, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, UCLA. But they’re sixth all-time in national championships with 4, ahead of Kansas (3). It is just bizarre that instead of being in a league with Syracuse, Georgetown, Louisville, Villanova, and Notre Dame, they’re instead in a league with Tulsa, Houston, Tulane, ECU, and UCF. Temple is their closest geographic “rival.” They’re truly in the a position even worse than the one people worried KU would end up in.
Right now, UConn is choosing to ride it out with the American because it feels it has invested too much in football to do otherwise. But is there a breaking point for UConn?
Unlike any other school in their conference, I believe they have an open invitation to the Big East, which would give them a truly strong conference schedule with opponents familiar and meaningful to their fans. In those years when UConn loses 10, 11, or 12 games, they’re likely to get into the tournament in the Big East than the American. Most importantly, they’d have a safe conference home for their premier sport.
What would it take for UConn to take the bait and go to the Big East? Would they go if, say, the Big 12 takes Cincinnati and either Memphis or UCF? What’s UConn’s incentive for staying in the AAC at that point? Independence would be very difficult, but is it that crazy to think Fox Sports would be willing to pay $2M/year (AAC money) for UConn home games in order to bolster its Big East viewership? If the MAC was willing to accept UConn for football only (considering UConn brings more branding than UMass does), would that be so much worse than an AAC without Cincinnati and Memphis/UCF? If the Mountain West wanted to get east coast exposure with a football-only UConn, would UConn consider?
I just can’t help but wonder whether UConn is quietly exploring all its options. The ACC, Big Ten, or even the Big 12 would be most preferable, but short of that, I just cannot imagine UConn sitting on its hands and assuming the American conference is its best and only option.
LikeLike
What would it take for UConn to take the bait and go to the Big East?
IMO – UConn would have to know it is shut out of the P5 permanently. According to Louisville’s AD, UConn’s name was originally printed in ink on the ACC invite that UL ended up getting. UConn knows they are next up if there is any additional eastern P5 movement, so they must keep their football team at the highest level possible so there is no reason to pass over the Huskies again.
LikeLike
Michael in Raleigh,
“Five years later, has anyone noticed that while Kansas is safe, a different blue blood has instead been left without a truly secure conference home: UConn.”
Some people have mentioned UConn ad nauseum.
“Sure, I know UConn is thought of as a “new blood.” They still don’t get mentioned alongside those six always listed at the top (in alphabetical order): Duke, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, UCLA. But they’re sixth all-time in national championships with 4, ahead of Kansas (3).”
I’d lump schools this way:
Tier 1a (the purest of blue bloods) – Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina
Tier 1b (other blue bloods) – Indiana, UCLA, UConn
IN and UCLA are falling and UConn is all recent success. The other 4 are on their own level.
“Right now, UConn is choosing to ride it out with the American because it feels it has invested too much in football to do otherwise. But is there a breaking point for UConn?”
I’m sure there is, but we’re not there yet. Maybe if they still don’t get moved up after the GORs expire in the 2020s.
“What would it take for UConn to take the bait and go to the Big East?”
Probably knowing they would never get a P5 invitation.
“Independence would be very difficult, but is it that crazy to think Fox Sports would be willing to pay $2M/year (AAC money) for UConn home games in order to bolster its Big East viewership?”
Independence would kill UConn football. Nobody wants to play them. And yes, I think Fox would be crazy to pay them $2M/year. Nobody cares about UConn football.
“If the MAC was willing to accept UConn for football only (considering UConn brings more branding than UMass does), would that be so much worse than an AAC without Cincinnati and Memphis/UCF?”
I don’t think UConn makes sense for the MAC. The MAC doesn’t want to bring in a partial member that might dominate them in football. Besides, UMass was a pain in the butt with travel and the odd number of teams. Maybe if UConn offered a bunch of OOC games in hoops?
“I just can’t help but wonder whether UConn is quietly exploring all its options.”
All non-P5 schools are doing that all the time.
LikeLike
““If the MAC was willing to accept UConn for football only (considering UConn brings more branding than UMass does), would that be so much worse than an AAC without Cincinnati and Memphis/UCF?”
I don’t think UConn makes sense for the MAC. The MAC doesn’t want to bring in a partial member that might dominate them in football. Besides, UMass was a pain in the butt with travel and the odd number of teams. Maybe if UConn offered a bunch of OOC games in hoops?”
Remember that UMass was a pain in the butt precisely because Temple fled … Temple was the #13 and UMass the #14 to even it out and put Toledo/BGU in the same (Western) division. So if the MAC wanted to add UConn FB-only (having good reason to think UConn might stay for a while), a new affiliation with UMass could easily be worked out (and presumably on the same terms … if UConn skipped out, UMass would be on a 2 years clock to decide whether to go all-in or all-out).
As far as hoops, Temple and UMass were supposed to have 3 OOC MAC BBall games on their schedule, balanced home and away. I’d presume it would be the same deal for Temple.
Fans and Athletic Directors might think of the travel as a pain, but I’d expect that the Presidents of Buffalo, Kent, Akron and OU would value the Eastern Exposure, and the President of more Chicago-centric MiamiU would likely go along with the interests of OU, and they would be the schools playing on the east coast every year … BGU, Toledo, the Michigan Directionals, Ball State and NIU would only be traveling to the east coast every second or third year.
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“Remember that UMass was a pain in the butt precisely because Temple fled … Temple was the #13 and UMass the #14 to even it out and put Toledo/BGU in the same (Western) division.”
They never overlapped. UMass was supposed to be #14 but replaced Temple instead. UMass refused to become a full MAC member so the MAC is kicking them out after this season.
The MAC has had terrible luck with football-only members, so why go through it again? It’s obvious UConn has no intention of joining permanently. At least Temple and UMass might have stayed for a while.
“So if the MAC wanted to add UConn FB-only (having good reason to think UConn might stay for a while),”
Why would they think that? UConn would leave at the drop of a hat. The MAC needs willing members, not grudging ones.
“a new affiliation with UMass could easily be worked out (and presumably on the same terms … if UConn skipped out, UMass would be on a 2 years clock to decide whether to go all-in or all-out).”
The MAC would be better off chasing schools like JMU, Liberty, Towson, Delaware, etc.
“As far as hoops, Temple and UMass were supposed to have 3 OOC MAC BBall games on their schedule, balanced home and away. I’d presume it would be the same deal for Temple.”
I believe it was 4 games.
As part of their football-only MAC membership, UMass has also been forced to schedule 4 MAC schools per season in basketball. That agreement will end immediately with the school’s 2015 departure set.
“Fans and Athletic Directors might think of the travel as a pain,”
It’s a financial burden for them. P5 schools can go wherever they want, but MAC schools lose big money on trips like that. On their budgets, that’s important.
“but I’d expect that the Presidents of Buffalo, Kent, Akron and OU would value the Eastern Exposure, and the President of more Chicago-centric MiamiU would likely go along with the interests of OU, and they would be the schools playing on the east coast every year … BGU, Toledo, the Michigan Directionals, Ball State and NIU would only be traveling to the east coast every second or third year.”
So 4 schools would want it and a 5th might go along? That’s not very compelling.
LikeLike
“The MAC would be better off chasing schools like JMU, Liberty, Towson, Delaware, etc” . Adding too many of these east-laying schools might lead the MAC to splitting into 2 conferences. A future conference of former west division MAC schools might see North Dakota State, Iowa State (if they end up homeless after a B12 implosion) and 1 or more current MVC-F teams. Would a UW campus currently in DIII consider a move to a western MAC?
LikeLike
urbanleftbehind,
“The MAC would be better off chasing schools like JMU, Liberty, Towson, Delaware, etc” .
Adding too many of these east-laying schools might lead the MAC to splitting into 2 conferences.
The MAC has several problems right now that adding 2 eastern schools could help:
1. The same demographic issues as the B10. Adding 2 schools in MD, VA or DE would help.
2. Despite being 25 miles apart and bitter rivals, Toledo and BGSU are in separate divisions. With 6 OH schools plus Buffalo, 1 OH school has to be in the west and that’s Toledo right now. Adding 2 eastern teams would let both of them be in the west. I’d prefer to have all 6 OH teams together, but I can’t think of any 2 western schools that would address demographics for the MAC and be realistic candidates.
3. More markets hopefully mean more money.
LikeLike
““Remember that UMass was a pain in the butt precisely because Temple fled … Temple was the #13 and UMass the #14 to even it out and put Toledo/BGU in the same (Western) division.”
They never overlapped. UMass was supposed to be #14 …”
And since I was referring to why UMass was CHOSEN, that is precisely what I was referring to. They were CHOSEN TO BE #14 as a FB-only member to be an east coast partner to Temple. They affiliation agreement had terms that if the other FB-only member left, two year later the MAC could start a two-year clock on all-in or all-out.
If UConn wanted to join the MAC FB-only, they’d not be at the UMass level, they’d be at the Temple level … if the MAC thought that UConn was going to be in the MAC for a decade or more, they would not be looking at whether to add them, but rather how to add them.
“So 4 schools would want it and a 5th might go along? That’s not very compelling.”
That’s with reference to addressing the presumption that travel cost is a deal killer. It wasn’t a deal killer for Temple: instead the MAC went out to look for a second east coast member so that they could have a trip to the east coast every year for every incumbent East Division member. Four out of five of those exposed to annual in-conference trips to the east coast would be the strongest supporters of the expansion, and the fifth wouldn’t dig in their heels.
Even with a pair of FB-only east coast schools added, the MAC would still be the lowest travel cost G5 conference. And the deal that they made regarding both UMass and Temple was that if the OTHER left, the one remaining would have to decide between going all-in or all-out … so they were taking the increase in travel costs of travel to UMass for all Olympic sports as part of their PREFERRED option over UMass FB-only on its own.
I think UConn is eventually ending up in the ACC, so I think these are moot points.
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“And since I was referring to why UMass was CHOSEN, that is precisely what I was referring to.”
I was just pointing it out since not everyone that reads FTT may be fully up to date on MAC history. I wasn’t saying you weren’t.
“If UConn wanted to join the MAC FB-only, they’d not be at the UMass level, they’d be at the Temple level … if the MAC thought that UConn was going to be in the MAC for a decade or more, they would not be looking at whether to add them, but rather how to add them.”
Probably so. I’d buy it if you said 20 years rather than a decade. 10 years is barely long enough to get any gain for the hassles of adding and then losing a member.
“That’s with reference to addressing the presumption that travel cost is a deal killer. It wasn’t a deal killer for Temple: instead the MAC went out to look for a second east coast member so that they could have a trip to the east coast every year for every incumbent East Division member. Four out of five of those exposed to annual in-conference trips to the east coast would be the strongest supporters of the expansion, and the fifth wouldn’t dig in their heels.”
I agree the MAC was dumb enough to vastly increase their travel costs before. It netted them endless scheduling hassles and 2 former members. Do they really want to continue with 13 members? Would they want UMass back (a better partner for UConn than Temple)? Would UMass want to come back? I wonder if the MAC has potentially decided to get out of the football-only affiliate game.
“I think UConn is eventually ending up in the ACC, so I think these are moot points.”
Always possible. The rule change should make that easier since they wouldn’t need a partner.
LikeLike
“I agree the MAC was dumb enough to vastly increase their travel costs before.”
But it wasn’t a “vast increase” in travel costs … on the standards of G5 football program travel costs, and in terms of the dollars relative to FB program budgets, it was a moderate increase. If the plan had gone through as hoped, they would have transitioned from the lowest travel cost G5 conference to the lowest travel cost G5 conference, just by not quite so large a margin. The American is spread from Connecticut to Central Texas, CUSA from Virginia to West Texas, the Sunbelt from North Carolina to Central Texas, the MWC from Albuquerque to Boise to North/South and Albuquerque to Hawaii East/West. The Great Lakes plus New England is quite compact compared to all of the other G5 conferences.
If UMass had taken the other side of the “all in / all out” option, it appeared that the MAC was prepared to invite JMU as the 14th all-sports member. That would have had more substantial travel cost implications, but the appeal of having UMass in MAC BBall (or Temple, as AFAIU, that term of the affiliation meant was also in the Temple agreement) in the BBall conference was considered to be strong enough to justify it.
“Do they really want to continue with 13 members?”
No, they would not want to add UConn first and then look for a 13th after, as they did with Temple.
“Would they want UMass back (a better partner for UConn than Temple)?”
Definitely. They did not want a 13 school configuration at all (hence the new version of the Temple affiliation agreement that matched the deal made with UMass).
“Would UMass want to come back?”
Unless membership in the American was on offer, it seems like UMass would want to come back in ~ football independence won’t be an easy lift for them.
“I wonder if the MAC has potentially decided to get out of the football-only affiliate game.”
I would be very surprised if they go looking for any FB-only affiliates, but the premise here is that UConn comes knocking on their door, and I think UConn would be too tempting an expansion to turn down.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
““As far as hoops, Temple and UMass were supposed to have 3 OOC MAC BBall games on their schedule, balanced home and away. I’d presume it would be the same deal for Temple.”
I believe it was 4 games.”
That’s right … I was going to double check that, but the WiFi I was on at the time was too slow. Four home BBall games annually against Temple/UMass, eight games total would have been a key element in the total deal. UConn/Umass would be even more attractive.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“”If the MAC thought that UConn was going to be in the MAC for a decade or more, they would not be looking at whether to add them, but rather how to add them.”
Probably so. I’d buy it if you said 20 years rather than a decade. 10 years is barely long enough to get any gain for the hassles of adding and then losing a member.”
LikeLike
“I’d prefer to have all 6 OH teams together, but I can’t think of any 2 western schools that would address demographics for the MAC and be realistic candidates.”
I think the MAC would prefer the opposite on balance … having the two NW OH schools in the same division as the Michigan directionals is part of why the Michigan directionals would all tend to favor Eastern expansion.
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“But it wasn’t a “vast increase” in travel costs … on the standards of G5 football program travel costs, and in terms of the dollars relative to FB program budgets, it was a moderate increase.”
I’m comparing it to their previous travel costs, which were by far the lowest in the nation as you noted. Any increase is a relatively big increase for them because of where their costs were. The fact that other G5 schools spend more on travel is irrelevant to how much of an increase it is for MAC schools.
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“I think the MAC would prefer the opposite on balance … having the two NW OH schools in the same division as the Michigan directionals is part of why the Michigan directionals would all tend to favor Eastern expansion.”
Perhaps. Everyone wants some OH access for recruiting, but the MAC is so compact I’m not sure that’s a major issue. Saving on travel is the other reason the MI schools might want the two OH schools in their division, but you’ve been busily arguing that travel is a non-factor.
I was clearly speaking for me. BGSU has a rivalry with Kent State that I’d like to preserve.
LikeLike
“Any increase is a relatively big increase for them because of where their costs were.”
Its not a big increase relative to the size of their athletic department budgets ~ which are, when it comes down to it, marketing budgets, and if the Presidents think that a couple of East coast schools make the conference a better marketing tool.
Whether or not they believed that UConn was ready to settle into the arrangement for a period of time substantially longer than Temple, or UCF, seems to me to be much more critical than the travel cost of a trip to Amherst every second year. I’d think that UConn would have to be willing to sign up for quite a hefty exit fee if they wanted the MAC to think they were serious.
LikeLike
“seems to me to be much more critical than the travel cost of a trip to Amherst every second year”
… that is, Amherst or New Hartford every second (or third) year. Its the incremental difference between an East Coast trip and an average of their cost for a trip to Buffalo, Akronx2, Athens and Oxford that is the “travel cost” that the six current Western Division schools, and Bowling Green, would have to weigh.
I don’t think its an accident that all MAC adds since the turn of the century have east of the eastern boundary of the MAC … and even in 1997 when NIU rejoined the MAC, Marshall also rejoined. The demographics of the Great Lakes states and of neighboring areas mean that MAC schools have to look either East or South for out of state enrollment growth, and for many of them, their established relationships were to the East Coast.
LikeLike
“I’d lump schools this way:
Tier 1a (the purest of blue bloods) – Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina
Tier 1b (other blue bloods) – Indiana, UCLA, UConn”
I would have to add Louisville to that Tier 1b.
LikeLike
Yes, there are other schools that might belong in Tier 1b. I stuck to the schools he named in his list, though, because it becomes a different argument then.
LikeLike
I don’t think UConn is in that group with men’s basketball. Their success is too recent and too dependent on one coach. Call back in 15 years.
LikeLike
You don’t think Auriemma might still be coaching then? 😀
LikeLike
bullet,
“I don’t think UConn is in that group with men’s basketball. Their success is too recent and too dependent on one coach. Call back in 15 years.”
You say that about almost everyone. You say it about Duke, too.
UConn has already won titles under 2 different coaches. They had 13 NCAA appearances before Calhoun.
Only 5 schools have more NCAA titles. Only 8 schools have more title game appearances (UConn is 4-0). Only 13 schools have more Final Four appearances. Yes, UConn’s history as an elite program is shorter than others. But tiers do have a time component to them.
It’s the same in football when people put FSU as a king. Or PSU for that matter. At some point, enough results has to be sufficient.
LikeLike
You could say it about Duke, but you would be wrong. They were a very good program before coach K. UCLA and Kentucky both won championships by beating Duke before coach K.
North Carolina, UCLA, Kentucky, Kansas and Indiana have not only made it to the final 4, but have won under multiple coaches.
LikeLike
bullet,
“North Carolina, UCLA, Kentucky, Kansas and Indiana have not only made it to the final 4, but have won under multiple coaches.”
So has UConn.
LikeLike
Right now, UConn is choosing to ride it out with the American because it feels it has invested too much in football to do otherwise. But is there a breaking point for UConn?
Unlike any other school in their conference, I believe they have an open invitation to the Big East, which would give them a truly strong conference schedule with opponents familiar and meaningful to their fans.
I do NOT believe that UConn has an open invitation to the Big East. I think the current Big East members have had it with upwardly-mobile football schools. There is nothing UConn could say, that would make the Big East believe that they’ve truly given up their P5 ambitions, and are happy to be a basketball school permanently.
As you noted, it is very difficult to be independent in Football. Last season, there were four independents in football: Notre Dame, BYU, Army, and Navy. These schools share one thing in common: they have broad, national constituencies, and aren’t dependent solely on local fans for their popularity. UConn doesn’t have that.
Navy will no longer be independent in 2015, and BYU has already stated that they are looking for a P5 invite. That leaves only Notre Dame and Army that are seemingly content to remain independent indefinitely. (But Army has been in a football conference before, and for the right offer, might very well do so again.) No one would think that an independent UConn team was anything other than a temporary arrangement.
And I agree with the others who’ve noted that the MAC probably wants nothing to do with a football-only school.
LikeLike
“…and BYU has already stated that they are looking for a P5 invite.”
When? With what conditions?
LikeLike
…and BYU has already stated that they are looking for a P5 invite.
When? With what conditions?
See this article:
Obviously, this is not a decision that Holmoe could make on his own, but it’s unlikely he would’ve said this if his higher-ups were not of a similar mind. This, of course, does not mean it’ll ever happen. Holmoe did not state any conditions, nor would it be appropriate to do so in such a forum.
LikeLike
I know none of you care, but the Bayou Bucket it back! Rice v Houston in 2017/18
http://blog.chron.com/sportsupdate/2015/04/uh-rice-to-renew-bayou-bucket-rivalry/
LikeLike
Thats like an updated version of Ampipe versus Walnut Heights
LikeLike
The Confidential’s occasional parody. http://atlanticcoastconfidential.com/2015/04/09/the-ncaa-is-going-bowl-crazy/
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25142280/tcus-patterson-criticizes-cfp-selection-committee-about-being-left-out
TCU’s HC finally criticized the CFP selection committee. Unfortunately, I think he’s wrong about his complaint (not whether or not TCU should get in, but about the process).
“I was told the reason we had a [selection] committee is we were going to take all that stuff out of it. [Conference] championship games shouldn’t have mattered,” Patterson said.
“Their job was to watch all this film and pick the four best teams no matter who you played, what you did. All the sudden it came down to, ‘Well, they played a championship game but they didn’t.’ That’s not what we were told. We were told they were going to pick the four best teams.”
Nobody ever said CCGs wouldn’t matter. That would be ludicrous. Likewise, the committee didn’t say OSU got in because they played a CCG and Baylor and TCU didn’t (or because OSU played 13 games to their 12). What they did say was that OSU’s total body of work, including winning an outright championship, was slightly better than Baylor’s and TCU’s bodies of work. Before OSU was an outright champion, they said TCU’s body of work was better.
He seems to have ignored the previous weeks when the committee said 3-6 were very close. OSU winning 59-0 over #13 WI at a neutral site is much more impressive than TCU beating ISU 55-3. In addition, OSU became an outright P5 conference champion while TCU was a co-champ that would lose the normal tiebreaker. That can be enough to switch the order of teams that were very close to begin with.
He also is conveniently ignoring that the committee rules explicitly say that they should factor in conference championships when separating equivalent teams. AL, OR, FSU and OSU didn’t become champ until that weekend, so that wasn’t factored in to the previous rankings. Being a co-champ of the B12 but losing the head-to-head match-up to the other co-champ probably didn’t help their cause when compared to a clear champion in the B10. That’s probably why Baylor passed them in the final rankings, and OSU was already ahead of Baylor.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-faqs
The committee selects the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering conference championships won, strength of schedule, head-to-head competition, comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory) and other relevant factors that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.
This is why I think Delany’s idea of using tiers makes some sense. Similarly, they could produce rankings with point totals like the polls have. That way, you get an idea of the separation they see between teams. The gap between 2 and 3 last year was probably larger than the gap from 3 to 6 in the eyes of the committee.
I’d suggest they produce their rankings with points normalized at 100 for #1.
1. AL – 100
2. OR – 95
3. FSU – 87
4. OSU – 86
5. Baylor – 85
6. TCU – 84
etc
If the previous week had been:
1. AL – 100
2. OR – 95
3. TCU – 87
4. FSU – 86
5. OSU – 85
6. Baylor – 84
It would be much easier to see how winning outright titles moved FSU and OSU up and how Baylor’s H2H win bumped them over TCU.
LikeLike
TCU beat Iowa St. as bad as you could a weak opponent and fell from 3rd to 6th. In beating Iowa St., they became a “conference champion.” He’s got a legitimate complaint.
LikeLike
I’ve criticized the coaches on the committee, but clearly they saw something in Ohio St. (other than 1 game) that the scores really didn’t indicate. When you look at scoreboard prior to the playoff, Ohio St. doesn’t compare to Alabama or Oregon or, IMO TCU. Baylor looks a little better as well and FSU was unbeaten.
LikeLike
bullet,
“TCU beat Iowa St. as bad as you could a weak opponent and fell from 3rd to 6th. In beating Iowa St., they became a “conference champion.” He’s got a legitimate complaint.”
Please note what I said. I don’t have a problem with him complaining about not getting chosen. I have a problem with the specific complaint that he voiced. Nobody ever said CCGs didn’t matter or that who you played didn’t matter.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/frequently-asked-questions
How are the teams that go to the playoff determined?
The four teams that go to the College Football Playoff are determined by the College Football Playoff Selection Committee. The selection committee will choose the four teams for the playoff based on strength of schedule, head-to-head results against common opponents, championships won and other factors.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/frequently-asked-questions
What criteria does the selection committee use to rank the teams?
The committee selects the teams using a process that distinguishes among otherwise comparable teams by considering conference championships won, strength of schedule, head-to-head competition, comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory) and other relevant factors that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.
Selection committee members have flexibility to examine whatever data they believe is relevant to inform their decisions. They also review a significant amount of game video. Among the many factors the committee members consider are win-loss record, strength of schedule, head-to-head results, comparison of results against common opponents and conference championships won. The playoff group has retained SportSource Analytics to provide the data platform for the committee’s use. This platforms allow the committee members to compare and contrast teams on every level possible. Each member evaluates the data at hand, and then the individuals will vote to produce a group decision.
Of course a CCG matters, as it’s part of the body of work. It’s an important part, too, as it’s generally one of the toughest games on the schedule.
As to the specifics of this case:
* TCU beat 2-9 ISU – this shouldn’t help TCU
* FSU beat #12 GT – this should help FSU
* OSU beat #13 WI – this should help OSU
* Baylor beat #9 KSU – this should help Baylor
Advantage – everyone except TCU. The other teams all beat a top 15 opponent. FSU and OSU won at neutral sites, too, so that should help them even more than home wins for the B12 pair. MOV isn’t supposed to be incented, but OSU crushed WI and that had to have an impact on the committee.
* TCU became a P5 co-champion (that lost H2H versus the other co-champion) – this should help TCU (how much is unclear)
* FSU became an outright P5 champion – this should help OSU
* OSU became an outright P5 champion – this should help OSU
* Baylor became a P5 co-champion (that won H2H versus the other co-champion) – this should help Baylor
Advantage – everyone except TCU. Two became outright champions while Baylor was a co-champion with a head to head win over the other co-champion in TCU. I don’t think the committee viewed TCU’s claim to a P5 title as equivalent to what FSU, OSU and Baylor earned.
The B12 can say what they want about co-champions, but I don’t think the people in the room agrees. Baylor’s win over KSU plus their owning the HSH over TCU moved Baylor past TCU. FSU and OSU were already ahead of Baylor and maintained their positions by also beating top 15 teams and also being P5 champions.
In other words, TCU didn’t fall to 6th. The other 3 climbed due to what they accomplished that final weekend. The committee had been saying how close the teams were for several weeks.
“I’ve criticized the coaches on the committee, but clearly they saw something in Ohio St. (other than 1 game) that the scores really didn’t indicate. When you look at scoreboard prior to the playoff, Ohio St. doesn’t compare to Alabama or Oregon or, IMO TCU. Baylor looks a little better as well and FSU was unbeaten.”
All of the teams had elite offenses except Alabama and FSU, and those two were very good on offense as well. Alabama and TCU had elite defenses, but OSU’s was very good and ahead of OR’s plus well ahead of Baylor’s and FSU’s. The advanced stats said the same things basically.
I think it was fairly simple:
1. Which teams are “clearly” the best? AL and OR – they’re in
2. Who makes up that next tier? FSU, TCU, OSU and Baylor – 2 get in
3. Who really won their conference? FSU, OSU and Baylor – 2 of those 3 get in
4. Who is the least excellent of that group? Baylor due to defense – FSU and OSU get in
TCU’s only real chance to get in that last week was to be seen as clearly superior to FSU, OSU and Baylor, but the committee had been saying for weeks those teams were lumped together in their minds. Nothing they did versus ISU could create that separation without losses from the others.
If OSU had a close win over WI, Baylor might have gotten in instead. But their H2H win over TCU would have kept TCU out (undefeated FSU was a gimme).
LikeLike
I don’t think any of TCU, Baylor, or Ohio State had a legitimate complaint if they were left out. They all lost a game and they were all very close together in total body of work. The committee could have justifiably taken any and left any out and none of them would have had room to complain .
I think the CCGs are being over-emphasized somewhat. They mattered, but only as another game.
What really hurt TCU might well have been Baylor. Forget the conference championship implications that everyone bring up. Baylor had a head to head victory and if the rest of the body of resumes were similar (which they were after Kansas State lost to Baylor in the final week), then they almost had to put Baylor higher. Once Baylor was higher, it came down to Ohio State or Baylor and Ohio State was already ahead of Baylor before the 59-0 victory over Wisconsin.
LikeLike
The decision to drop TCU from 3rd to 6th is certainly explainable in hindsight, and Brian has explained it well.
But it wasn’t exactly obvious at the time: practically no one saw it coming, including plenty of people who were well aware of the selection rules, and had heard the committee chairman’s weekly Delphic pronouncements.
I gather the committee has decided not to change their system for 2015, and I think this is wise. In the early days of the BCS era, the system changed repeatedly, and lost a lot of credibility in the process. I would prefer to build up a multi-year data set, rather than tweaking the system every time someone disagrees with the result.
LikeLike
I think people just really ignored the fact that conference championships would be rewarded but that they weren’t considered at all until after the last week. Fans were already factoring them into their thoughts since anyone who lost the last week (CCG or not) was going to drop out of the running. I think that distinction just didn’t sink in for most people.
People are also misled by ordinal lists to think that teams are equally spaced. That’s why I suggested a point system to more accurately reflect the thoughts of the committee.
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/04/08/all-american-illinois-wr-mike-dudek-tears-acl-pratice
Frank, sorry to hear that your stud WR blew out his ACL. Dudek was really good as a freshman.
LikeLike
@Brian – Ugh. Too many knee injuries to players on my favorite teams these days. Dudek is also from my current hometown of Naperville.
LikeLike
Perhaps this was the price the knee god required for Rose to come back.
LikeLike
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/04/08/u-md-students-demand-byrd-stadium-be-renamed-citing-racist-legacy/
UMD’s student government is supporting a push to rename the football stadium. It’s named after H.C. Byrd, a former football coach who eventually became school president (1936-1954). Unfortunately, he was also a racist and segregationist.
A U-Md. spokesman said Wednesday before the vote that existing names on all buildings on the College Park campus represent the university’s long history and culture. Ultimate authority for the naming of buildings rests with the University System of Maryland Board of Regents.
“We are not inclined to ignore or try to erase the past of our University, or the past of our state for that matter,” the spokesman said. “However, in accordance with our shared governance practice, this matter has been sent to the University’s Facilities Naming Committee for further review.”
Mike Lurie, a spokesman for the Board of Regents, said in an e-mail that the regents aren’t yet considering such a proposal.
“Currently, the Byrd Stadium renaming question is one that, at this time, is being discussed on the UM College Park campus,” Lurie said. “Proposals to name or rename facilities are to be submitted by the institutional president to the chancellor and the board.”
LikeLike
And Lincoln wanted to send the slaves back to Africa. He supported the Liberia concept. There comes a point where you really need to quit judging the distant past on present day standards. Its one thing if something got named after Nathan Bedford Forrest in 1960 (Confederate Cavalry “terrorist” and later KKK leader). But this isn’t one of those situations.
LikeLike
I was mostly surprised they didn’t have someone better to name the stadium after or else didn’t fall back on a traditional name like Memorial Stadium.
Maybe name it after Jim Tatum (73-15-4 with 2 perfect seasons and a national title) if they choose to rename it.
LikeLike
Bullet,
I’m going to cut you some slack on your really inappropriate comment and way out of context example. The distant past you reference rears its ugly head every time an unarmed man of color is killed by a police officer over something trivial, which happened six days.
You are a great poster of most things, but on this topic you should have stayed quiet.
LikeLike
Byrd was president better than 60 years ago. I think Bullets point is valid. If he was a racist today things would be different, but he lived in a time where that was common and I suspect his position on that wasn’t radically different than a great many of the time (if it was the rest here is invalid). As I put below, I think we have to judge historical figures by how they compared to those of their time, not how they compare to those of around us today. The stadium didn’t get named after him because he was racist, it got named after him because of what he meant to the university.
In 100 years there are a great many things our generations probably won’t be well remembered for (for better and for worse). I hope they don’t decide that anyone holding these common beliefs of this day are unworthy of being honored for the positives we did achieve.
LikeLike
Conversely, you could use that same explanation for why it was OK to name the stadium after him back then but now that name wouldn’t be appropriate. Lincoln did a lot of things for the slaves that counterbalance his opinion on Liberia. Did Byrd do anything similar?
I’m not outraged, but I don’t have a problem if UMD students and alumni want to make this change.
LikeLike
I am sure we could go back in time and study a person who has a building named in their honor who was anti-gay or who was contra to other current social injustices. Times change and general opinion or beliefs also change.
LikeLike
And, fortunately, we have no particular reason to believe that dead people care if we change the name of buildings that were originally named in their honor. The only reason not to have a “building name jubilee” every fifty years is if the dream of having their name on a building permanently is convincing some wealthy donors to toss some more money the way of the University. So, as long as its only done “reluctantly” when it becomes some kind of issue, changing the name of a few buildings one or two times in a century doesn’t seem like a big deal.
LikeLike
Agreed Bullet,
There’s all kinds of things that our generations believe that future generations will look back on us for as being stupid, immoral, and just plain wrong. When looking at historical figures, you have to look at how they stood out from their time both good and bad, not how they stand out from the average person of our time. Otherwise we will be judged just as harshly on a lot of things that our culture today says is OK to believe in.
I hate political correctness with a passion.
Eric
LikeLike
Totally agree Eric.
LikeLike
I’m really struggling to see how bullet’s comment can qualify as “really inappropriate” & the example being “way out of context”.
LikeLike
http://thebiglead.com/2015/04/10/15-for-2015-college-football-teams-that-could-be-hurt-by-hard-schedules/
15 teams that might by hurt by their difficult schedules.
Includes:
MN
MSU
RU
LikeLike
The 11-year-old in me liked this line about Georgia:
“Last three games: at Auburn, triple-option Georgia Southern, at Georgia Tech. Not the year to fart away a game against South Carolina.“
LikeLike
http://www.bigten.org/genrel/041215aaa.html
NE won the bowling national title. That brings the B10 up to 8 titles for the academic year so far.
In addition a gymnast from IL own the high bar and another from MI won the men’s floor exercise.
LikeLike
Sorry, I meant that a guy from PSU won the floor exercise.
LikeLike
BTN announced their primetime schedule for 2015.
Twelve of the 14 Big Ten schools will play in primetime on BTN, and four of the games are conference contests, including Minnesota at Iowa in the first-ever primetime battle for the Floyd of Rosedale Trophy at Kinnick Stadium.
…
In all, BTN will televise at least 40 football games this fall. Start times and television arrangements for other early season games will be announced at a later date.
BTN’s Primetime Schedule
Saturday, Sept. 12
South Alabama at Nebraska
Saturday, Sept. 19
Rutgers at Penn State
Saturday, September 26
Hawaii at Wisconsin
Saturday, October 3
Michigan at Maryland
Saturday, October 10
Michigan State at Rutgers
Saturday, November 14
Minnesota at Iowa
*Kent State at Illinois on Friday, Sept. 4 previously announced
*Florida International at Indiana on Sept. 12, Pittsburgh at Iowa on Sept. 19 and Ball State at Northwestern on Sept. 26 will also appear in primetime in the Big Ten team’s home market and on Extra Football Game Channels and BTN2Go elsewhere.
The battle for Floyd should be the biggest game yet for BTN.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25147666/ohio-state-extends-urban-meyers-contract-through-2020-season
Not surprisingly, OSU has given Urban Meyer a contract extension and substantial pay raise. He’s still not getting Saban money, but he’s getting closer.
Ohio State announced on Monday that it had extended Urban Meyer’s contract through the 2020 season. Meyer will see a bump in pay from $4.9 million to $5.8 million in 2015, and will average $6.5 million annually through the six years remaining on his contract.
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/
Based on USA Today’s coaching salary database, I think this makes Meyer #2 in the country.
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/more-sports/2015/04/12/charles-barkley-sxsw-masters-espn-lou-holtz
Lou Holtz is leaving ESPN. Both sides are calling it mutual.
With Davis moving to GameDay and Holtz no longer in an analyst chair, I’d expect ESPN to significantly retool its college football afternoon studio setup. There are plenty in Bristol who knew the Holtz-Mark May shtick was long past its shelf life and this is a good time to change things up. No doubt part of the thinking on Holtz’s part was to move on without Davis in the host chair.
LikeLike
Mark May is far more annoying. His smugness about everything is unbearable, including his dismissal of Ohio State even after they beat Alabama. Buckeye fans let him know how they feel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qvNg-SOpO4
LikeLike
With 2 of the 3 gone from that show, hopefully May gets “reassigned” too.
LikeLike
They’ll just add Stephen A Smith and Skip Bayless so we can all embrace debate.
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/article/big-score-college-bowl-game-payouts-surpass-500-million
Last year’s bowl games paid out over $500M dollars, almost $200M more than the previous year.
According to an NCAA report to be released Tuesday, the 39 postseason FBS games distributed $505.9 million to the participating conferences and schools. The schools spent $100.2 million to take part in bowl games.
Total payouts from 35 postseason games from the 2013-14 season were $309.9 million while schools spent $97.8 million to participate. For the 2012-13 season, payouts were $300.8 million and expenses were $90.3 million.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/04/15/liberty-university-ncaa-full-cost-of-attendance-fcs-fbs/25825491/
As part of their plan to move up to I-A ASAP, Liberty has announced it’ll pay FCOA for all 20 of it’s sports.
Expect to see them in the SB or CUSA momentarily, especially if UAB stays without football.
LikeLike
Sun Belt considered Liberty at spring meetings 2013 and 2014. Not sure that offering full cost changes the voting dynamic.
As for CUSA, there are comments from ODU and MTSU endorsing Liberty or JMU but if they aren’t going to 16 I can’t imagine a Virginia school replacing UAB
LikeLike
Liberty couldn’t afford a wrestling team. Started one and folded it a couple years later, not very long ago.
LikeLike
They seem to think they have money now. All those online students probably help their bottom line.
LikeLike
IMO – I don’t see Liberty on anyone’s short list.
LikeLike
If they’re looking to raise up a I-AA, then one that already is paying FCOA is a strong choice. Being in VA is a decent location, too.
LikeLike
I get the sense that there are huge academic issues with Liberty. It’s a predominately online school (100K vs 14K on campus according to wikipedia) that isn’t well regarded (#80 Southern Regional U, #79 on line program according to US News). Throw in their controversial side (teaching young earth creationism, banning their College Democrats) and I see a whole lot of reasons for the Sun Belt to pass. If the Sun Belt wants an entry in Virginia, James Madison (18K, #6 Regional) is probably a better choice.
LikeLike
USA Today on Liberty
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/04/15/liberty-university-ncaa-full-cost-of-attendance-fcs-fbs/25825491/?siteID=je6NUbpObpQ-ihz9BIpViIHYhA6r3U2mzg
For all of Liberty’s ambition, in reality there has been resistance to add the Flames to a league at the presidential level. There are plenty of theories for that. Part of it could be the school’s Evangelical bent and some politically-charged controversies in its past. Another element is the school’s massive online enrollment, which could be off-putting to presidents of more traditional universities. There’s also a financial element: Some schools, particularly in a league like the Sun Belt, don’t want a competitor coming in with a budget that blows everybody out of the water. In that respect, Liberty may be too financially sound.
LikeLike
Why not go FBS independent? I’m sure the SEC and ACC would acknowledge Liberty as P5-equivalent for scheduling purposes for some of the same reasons as Army, and in turn the remaining P5 leagues would find it hard to hem and haw on it (also if the ACC insists on survival post 2025 and a raid of UVA, UNC, Duke or others, could be an acceptable replacement). No way a southern public school risks the ire of evangelicals to say “uh no you dont count as an acceptable OOC opponent”.
LikeLike
Why not go FBS independent?
I believe the NCAA says you have to have a conference invite before you move up.
I’m sure the SEC and ACC would acknowledge Liberty as P5-equivalent for some of the same reasons as Army
IMO – highly unlikely. Army/Navy/BYU are special cases. If you are going to count Liberty, why not Appalachian St?
No way a southern public school risks the ire of evangelicals to say “uh no you don’t count as an acceptable OOC opponent”.
Evangelicals are so decentralized, I would be shocked to see evangelicals that don’t have any relationship with Liberty to really care.
LikeLike
“Why not go FBS independent?”
Mike’s first reason is really sufficient all by itself: you can’t. You need an invite from an FBS conference to transition from FCS to FBS.
LikeLike
No three division ACC.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12702767/acc-commissioner-john-swofford-says-no-plans-go-three-divisions
“Our purpose behind initiating that discussion was really not about anything specific we would necessarily do, but based on the whole deregulation of a number of NCAA issues in recent years,” Swofford told ESPN.com. “We said over and over again that doesn’t mean we would necessarily change anything within our own league.
“We just feel conferences should have the opportunity to do that both in terms of the number of teams in a league and whether you can have a championship as well as how you determine which teams play in that championship game. During these conversations, we haven’t had any real discussion about a three-division ACC. That has never had any legs in our discussions, and so far, any change to what we’re doing now has not had any real legs.”
LikeLike
Dropping the round robin always seemed like their first choice (6+2 vs 7+1). Maybe going divisionless will gain some traction.
LikeLike
http://collegespun.com/college-spun-2/heres-where-the-uconn-to-the-big-east-rumor-originated
Some clarification on something Frank tweeted.
There’s been a rumor on Twitter about UConn talking to the Big East about membership. It seems to be about men’s lacrosse joining in 2018 when they move up to be a D-I team.
LikeLike
UConn in Big East Lacrosse makes a hell of a lot of sense … right now Big East Lacrosse is Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, St. John’s, Nova and associate Denver to make up the numbers and get to six.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12698084/condoleezza-rice-pac-12-commissioner-larry-scott-say-four-right-number-college-football-playoff
Condoleezza Rice and Larry Scott talk CFP among other things. The gist is that they see 4 teams as ideal and unlikely to change any time soon.
“I feel pretty strongly about four now because I thought that the rivalry weekend — that Saturday after Thanksgiving — almost felt like a play-in game,” said Rice, a professor and former provost at Stanford. “Now the Iron Bowl, Alabama has to beat Auburn. You could imagine the circumstances in another year where the Civil War, Oregon really has to beat Oregon State. There are questions whether they will. …
“I agree that if it got much larger, I don’t think you would have that momentum coming out of the regular season, so it’s the best possible scenario.”
Scott said he didn’t see “any movement to expand beyond four,” citing the extended academic calendar, the toll it would take on the athletes and the importance of the regular season as some of the main reasons.
He said the only way the Power 5 conferences would even consider expanding the playoff is if they were guaranteed spots in it, which would detract from the drama and anticipation of the season.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/117925/b1g-stacks-up-well-in-future-nonconference-sos
B10 future OOC schedules stack up pretty well.
Though not every game in the next five years has been set, Stats & Info filled the holes with either an average Power 5 opponent, an average Group of 5 opponent or an FCS opponent, based on each team’s scheduling trends. The number of nonconference teams each team plays did not matter; only the strength of the competition mattered. Remember, Big Ten teams will go down to three nonconference games per season in 2016 with the advent of the nine-game league schedule.
With all that in mind, here’s how Big Ten teams rank nationally in terms of future nonconference schedule strength:
6. Ohio State Buckeyes
9. Michigan Wolverines
12. Michigan State Spartans
16. Purdue Boilermakers
17. Maryland Terrapins
20. Northwestern Wildcats
24. Nebraska Cornhuskers
32. Wisconsin Badgers
39. Minnesota Golden Gophers
42. Penn State Nittany Lions
50. Indiana Hoosiers
54. Rutgers Scarlet Knights
55. Iowa Hawkeyes
61. Illinois Fighting Illini
LikeLike
Side note:
The Big Ten did not place a team in the top five, but the league has six teams in the top 20. That ties the ACC for the most teams in the top 20 and shows that the Big Ten has done a good job of scheduling up but not handcuffing itself. (There’s no real benefit, for example, in having the No. 1 hardest schedule, especially if you lose). By contrast, the SEC has only one team in the top 20 — and South Carolina checks in at No. 18. Way to keep challenging yourselves out of conference, Southern friends.
LikeLike
Michigan has gone away from playing MAC teams in its non-conference schedule and is shifting more towards the Mountain West and American Athletic Conferences to fill in the one-and-done games.
2015 – at Utah, Oregon State, UNLV, BYU
2016 – Hawaii, UCF, Colorado
2017 – Florida (in Dallas, TX), Cincinnati, Air Force
2018 – Arkansas, Open Date, SMU
2019 – at Arkansas, Two Open Dates
It’ll be interesting to see what new UM AD Jim Hackett and HC Jim Harbaugh do with the open dates for 2018 and 2019. Former UM AD David Brandon scheduled both VIrginia Tech and Washington for home-and-home dates in 2020/1. Will UM do the same thing in 2018/9, i.e., a second Power Five conference team on the non-conference schedule or will the Wolverines go with a couple of one and done type opponents? We’ll see. If they do the former, I assume Michigan would move up in the rankings IRT future non-conference schedules.
Other teams on Michigan’s future schedules are UCLA (2022/3), Texas (2024/7) and Oklahoma (2025/6). This year’s game with BYU, the contest with Florida and all the other games on the slate from 2020 onward were scheduled after Notre Dame opted to pull out of its annual game with Michigan. The home-and-home with Arkansas was set up before the ending of the UM-ND series and was supposed to mark a two-year hiatus in the series.
LikeLike
If this is the “wave of the future” scheduling-wise for the B1G, MAC schools are in for a downgrade of fortune, financially (no state big brother payout games) and competition-wise (may have to backfill more from FCS and have OOCs solely from G5 and below).Just another defacto manifestation of a third league in D-1.
LikeLike
I think most B10 teams will keep playing the MAC. They’re cheaper than other G5s usually and being local makes it easier to draw fans.
LikeLike
And most SEC teams won’t play 2-3 Sun Belt schools in a season, so they bring in MAC schools as well.
LikeLike
No, the demand among P5 schools for G5 buy games is not going away, and so games against P5 schools at their home stadiums are not going away for the MAC schools. There might even be about the same number of those against the Big Ten, as the Big Ten is pushing for an end to FCS buy games. And that is a healthy number of games that are likely to be replaced with G5 buy games … for instance, coming up in weeks one and two of 2015: Southern Illinois at Indiana, Illinois State at Iowa, Richmond at Maryland, Norfolk State at Rutgers, Western Illinois at Illinois, Eastern Illinois at Northwestern, and Indiana State at Purdue.
I think{+} that the MAC “sell” games in the first two weeks are: Kent State at Illinois, Bowling Green at Tennessee, Akron at Oklahoma, Toledo at Arkansas, Ball State at Texas A&M, Bowling Green at Maryland, Buffalo at Penn State, and MiamiU at Wisconsin.
I think{+} the P5 H/H games (at least some are unbalanced contracts) are OkSU at CMU, MSU at WMU, Pitt at Akron, and UMass at Colorado.
The G5 H/H games are OhioU at Idaho, UNLV at NIU, Old Dominion at EMU, Marshall at OhioU, EMU at Wyoming, and WMU at GA Southern.
And the FCS buy games are VMI at Ball State, Stony Brook at Toledo, Albany at Buffalo, Presbyterian at MiamiU, Delaware State at Kent State, Monmouth at CMU, and Murray State at NIU.
The “wave of the future” is no more Big Ten schools playing at MAC stadiums … Indiana has played H/H with MAC schools to reduce costs, MSU had a package of 3-1’s with all 3 Michigan directionals, etc. Dropping to 3 OOC games and pushing to all Big Ten schools playing a P5 school OOC, which generally requires a H/H agreement, seems likely to close out most of the openings for that.
But while the MAC schools very much like the occasional home game with a Big Ten school, they are infrequent enough that losing them does not spell a big change to MAC scheduling.
LikeLike
{+} “I think” since this is just looking at the schedule at ESPN, going by what are usually buy games, and recognizing a few as a series already in progress. I did not look up contract announcements, so the status of one or more of these might be off.
LikeLike
I realize you are just copying the headline, but when you average it out, the Big 10 comes to 31.3. They are looking at 64 schools, so that puts the Big 10 just barely above average.
LikeLike
As you noted, I was copying the headline. And I’m not sure the conference average is all that important. Ideally all 5 P5 conferences would have about the same average (32) with similar distributions throughout the list. Not surprisingly, the P12 is toughest (3 of the top 4). The rankings are in an insider post, but the ones I can get from the conference blogs tell me this:
B10 = 31.3
SEC = 43.4
I’ll guess the P12 is in the low 20s, with the ACC and B12 near the B10.
LikeLike
What that doesn’t factor in is that the Pac 12 and Big 12 have 9 conference games and the Big 10 does for most, if not all of that time.
LikeLike
Correct. Also remember that they filled any vacancies with a fake team of appropriate difficulty based on each school’s history of OOC scheduling (I-AA, G5 or P5). And of course, using past history to predict how strong a team will be in any given year is iffy at best.
It seems to me that there’s no reason they couldn’t apply their method to the whole schedules as well and see how everyone looked over 12 games per year.
LikeLike
Which Tuesday is this announcement?
LikeLike
Cleveland state reinstated wrestling.
http://www.cleveland.com/sports/college/index.ssf/2015/04/cleveland_state_wrestling_team_1.html
LikeLike
Good to hear.
CSU is to raise student fees $1 per credit hour, or about $15 a semester, to assure wrestling’s future.
…
CSU chief marketing officer Rob Spademan said the decision to restore wrestling was reached at a senior staff meeting Wednesday afternoon. He said university took note of reaction to the March 30 announcement the team was to be defunded following the 2015-16 season to make room for men’s lacrosse.
That announcement was met with swift reaction at the school and across Northeast Ohio, a wrestling hotbed for decades, as well as within the national wrestling community.
Last week, CSU students voted, 975-650, in favor of a non-binding referendum to raise student fees $4-6 per credit hour to pay for wrestling and a women’s sport.
…
Spademan said CSU will look at adding or expanding a women’s sport once men’s lacrosse is up and running.
…
Initially, CSU planned to add men’s lacrosse and an undetermined women’s sport. When funding wasn’t available, Athletic Director John Parry said he chose to defund wrestling. Parry is a former lacrosse coach who pushed the fast-growing sport at the school to help attract students from out-ring suburbs.
“I think they weren’t as in touch with the community in Northeast Ohio and especially at Cleveland State as they should be,” Shaw said. “I think the analysis John Parry did was biased and I think it was a mistake.”
…
Initially, CSU planned to add men’s lacrosse and an undetermined women’s sport. When funding wasn’t available, Athletic Director John Parry said he chose to defund wrestling. Parry is a former lacrosse coach who pushed the fast-growing sport at the school to help attract students from out-ring suburbs.
“I think they weren’t as in touch with the community in Northeast Ohio and especially at Cleveland State as they should be,” Shaw said. “I think the analysis John Parry did was biased and I think it was a mistake.”
LikeLike
” ‘I think they weren’t as in touch with the community in Northeast Ohio and especially at Cleveland State as they should be,’ Shaw said. ‘I think the analysis John Parry did was biased and I think it was a mistake.’ ”
Sounds like a “New Coke” mistake … in pushing a strategy to reach out beyond the normal profile of Cleveland State (whether by pushing Lacrosse or whatever), its only BUILDING enrollment if its done without a loss of standing within its normal profile.
LikeLike
The first shot has been fired. Verizon FIOS gives customers lots more options:
http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/17/media/verizon-fios/
LikeLike
Starting Sunday, Verizon (VZ, Tech30) will begin to offer customers what it calls “Custom TV.” It will have a base package of 35 networks, including CNN, AMC, HGTV and the Food Network. Then, seven different bundles of networks will be grouped by types of programming. Customers can chose any two packages of networks as part of the basic fee, and can get additional bundles for $10 a month each.
The bundles include a sports package that includes ESPN and Fox Sports 1, and a second sports package that includes the NFL Network, the MLB Network and 18 regional sports channels that carry the games of local teams. An entertainment package will carry some of the most popular cable networks such as TBS, TNT and USA.
A news package will carry Fox News, MSNBC and CNBC, while a kids’ package will include the Disney Network, Nick and the Cartoon Network.
Finally, a pop culture package includes Comedy Central, E! and MTV, and a “lifestyle” package that includes Animal Planet, Bravo and Lifetime.
LikeLike
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/2015/04/16/free-tickets-um-crowd-streak/25913157/
MI inflated their attendance last year with 63,000 free tickets (8.6% of total attendance). It’s not news that schools inflate their attendance numbers, but MI likes to tout their 258 game streak with over 100k in attendance.
While comp tickets aren’t a new thing at Michigan, the practice ballooned during the 2014 season, particularly in the final home game against Maryland, when nearly 17,000 free tickets were distributed. That counted toward the final attendance of 101,717, the sparsest crowd at the Big House since 100,862 saw Michigan play Memphis in 1995.
There were 62,879 free tickets distributed during the 2014 season that accounted for roughly 8.6 percent of attendance, a sharp increase from the previous season, when 2.8 percent of the attendance came from comp tickets.
LikeLike
MI inflated their attendance last year with 63,000 free tickets (8.6% of total attendance). It’s not news that schools inflate their attendance numbers, but MI likes to tout their 258 game streak with over 100k in attendance.
All schools, including Michigan since forever, count all humans in attendance, whether they paid or not. I wouldn’t call that inflating attendance.
But what’s more significant (stated later in the article) is that Michigan does not scan every entrance, so they have no way of knowing that the claimed number actually attended. It’s fairly likely that the 100,000 streak was snapped last season. There were a few games where the nominal attendance was only barely above that figure, and there seemed to be large numbers of vacant seats.
LikeLike
I call it inflating because of the last sentence I quoted:
There were 62,879 free tickets distributed during the 2014 season that accounted for roughly 8.6 percent of attendance, a sharp increase from the previous season, when 2.8 percent of the attendance came from comp tickets.
Increasing your comp tickets by 300% is an attempt to inflate attendance. If MI had stuck to their “standard” ticket sales policies, the streak would have ended.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25152596/big-ten-ncaa-sports-is-house-of-cards-if-education-cant-be-defended
The B10 steps up to defend the importance of education in college sports. It started by presenting a report on freshman ineligibility.
The Big Ten on Friday released a 12-page report presenting the idea for freshman ineligibility, arguing that college sports “stands as a house of cards” if the industry can’t demonstrate that educating athletes is paramount.
In acknowledging that freshman ineligibiliity may not be the answer, the conference created a forum for a “national discussion” that addresses the criticism that too few athletes in major college football and basketball are being properly educated. The paper states college sports is at a “critical moment” due to media scrutiny, Congressional scrutiny, litigation and unionization efforts that portray the NCAA’s stated educational mission is a facade. The NCAA recently got sued over the North Carolina academic scandal.
…
The Big Ten says college sports faces a “systemic challenge” and must think “in terms of systematic solutions” and any idea should be on the table. Examples of ideas cited by the Big Ten include higher initial eligibility standards; financial incentives/disincentives tied to academic performance; changing playing and practice schedules; or commissioning “a standardized academic competency test that mitigates cultural biases to a greater degree than current standardized tests.”
Under the Big Ten freshman ineligibility idea nationally — the Big Ten wouldn’t go alone — football and men’s basketball players would have a choice of whether to turn pro. “It is not the responsibility of intercollegiate athletics to serve as professional minor leagues in any sport,” the report says.
The discussion about the return of freshman ineligibility — or a “year of readiness,” as the Big Ten describes — first surfaced in February. In all likelihood, it may never happen. Still, the Big Ten makes some attempts to address criticism of the idea.
Criticism: Academic redshirt years are already coming for college athletes who enroll in 2016, when initial eligibility standards increase.
…
The Big Ten suggests it’s even possible initial eligibility standards could be eliminated in football and men’s basketball by making freshmen ineligible. “Current continuing eligibility rules could remain the same, in which case second-year eligibility would be achieved by meeting current standards (e.g., 6, 18 and 24-hour rules with a 1.8 GPA.)”
Criticism: Sitting all football and men’s basketball players as freshmen would hurt those who are prepared academically.
…
The Big Ten says even if an athlete with “sterling academic credentials” doesn’t need academic remediation, “he can still benefit from a year of assimilation to college life, as even good students can struggle with the transition from high school to college.”
Why only football and men’s basketball? The Big Ten cites lower graduation and Academic Progress Rate scores in those sports. The Big Ten also says 32 of 37 academic fraud cases in the past 20 years involved football and/or men’s basketball, and 14 of the 20 current NCAA academic fraud cases involved one or both. Football and men’s basketball account for less than 19 percent of Division I participants, but those sports represent 80 percent of past or pending academic infractions cases, the Big Ten says.
…
Criticism: Sitting freshmen will cost too much money by adding scholarships for athletes who aren’t playing.
Financial costs were the main reason why freshman ineligibility disappeared in the 1970s. The Big Ten estimated the following aggregate costs for all of the Football Bowl Subdivision if freshman ineligibility occurred again:
* $21 million in football
* $26.25 million in men’s basketball
* $47.25 million in women’s sports (the Big Ten says it would take 5.4 additional women’s scholarships across 350 universities to offset $47.25 million in men’s scholarships)
That would leave a total of $94.5 million in new scholarship funding for 3,780 new full-scholarship opportunities. The estimated dollar amount represents less than 10 percent of postseason football and men’s basketball revenue distribution.
“As a possible source of funding for these increased scholarship costs, money could be provided by off-the-top allocations from television revenue from both the NCAA men’s basketball tournament and College Football Playoff,” the Big Ten says. “This approach would allow money generated by institutions of high market value and competitive success to be distributed across all of Division I for investment in new scholarship opportunities.”
For people interested in discussing reform ideas, the Big Ten created an online message board at http://office.bigten.org/respond. The conference also created an email address (educationfirst@bigten.org) for interested parties to directly email the Big Ten office with thoughts.
LikeLike
Click to access education-first-athletics-second.pdf
That’s the link for the whole paper.
LikeLike
Click to access q-and-a.pdf
There’s also this shorter Q&A about it.
LikeLike
I doubt freshman ineligibility will gets any traction at the NCAA level. If enacted at the conference level this will make the B1G less competitive in basketball as players that hope to go one & done (about 20x the number that achieve it) avoid the B1G.
LikeLike
The B10 explicitly said 2 important things in this paper, one of which I quoted above:
1. The B10 will not do this alone. They’d only do it if everyone did.
2. They acknowledge this might not be the right answer but want to at least start a national dialogue in order to find the best possible answer.
LikeLike
Other cable news-DOJ is leaning towards blocking Comcast/TW merger:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/04/17/comcast-time-warner-justice-department-deal-block/25947203/
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/118063/b1gfridayfive-top-draft-factories
A look at the top 5 NFL draft factories in the B10 since 2000:
1. OSU 101 picks (19 1st round)
2. WI 65 (12)
3. PSU 55 (10)
4. MI 59 (10)
5. NE 60 (4)
The list is obviously subjective with 3-5 all pretty close.
FYI:
IA 55 (6)
MSU 45 (5)
LikeLike
http://ohiostate.247sports.com/Bolt/OSU-Breaks-National-Spring-Game-Attendance-Record-36849275
In completely unimportant news, OSU reset the national record for spring game attendance today.
Top 10 Spring Game Crowds
99,391 — Ohio State (2015)
95,722 — Ohio State (2009)
92,310 — Alabama (2011)
92,138 — Alabama (2007)
91,312 — Alabama (2010)
84,050 — Alabama (2009)
83,401 — Auburn (2013)
81,112 — Ohio State (2012)
80,149 — Nebraska (2008)
78,526 — Alabama (2012)
http://ohiostate.247sports.com/Bolt/The-largest-crowds-ever-for-spring-football-games-36730712
Since only 4 schools are on that list, here’s the best some others have done:
Large spring game crowds of schools outside the top 10
76,500 – Penn State (2009)
73,801 – Tennessee (1986)
65,000 – Florida (2009)
60,000 – Michigan (2015)
53,818 – Florida State (2011)
51,088 – Arkansas (2013)
50,831 – Kentucky (2013)
46,073 – Georgia (2014)
46,000 – Texas (2012,2013)
45,212 – Texas A&M (2013)
LikeLike
Ohio Stadium was essentially full, for a spring game.
LikeLike
In terms of ACC alignment, I took some time to model out how a division-less structure might work out (and I think it comes together pretty well):
http://compu-picks.com/2015Offseason/20150418_ACC_Scheduling.html
LikeLike
A few quibbles:
1. CCG deregulation hasn’t been passed yet. People just said it seemed likely to pass by 2016.
2. The ACC won’t move to 9 games any time soon. Between locked rivalries OOC plus the ND games, they just don’t feel the need to add that extra game. I know you mentioned it, but you still planned for 9 games. Do you have an alternative if they stick with 8?
I’d keep your basic plan and just drop 1 game:
Temporary Division A = Red + 1/2 of Green
Temporary Division B = Blue + 1/2 of Green
Play a full round robin in each temporary division, which leaves 2 rotating games:
* Green plays Green (their rotation comes from switching divisions regularly).
* Red and Blue play each other, with UVA/VT locked (I’d unlock Clemson/NCSU). That means UVA and VT see the other Red or Blue teams 25% of the time. The others see each other 44% of the time.
* You could keep Clemson/NCSU locked, it just further complicates things. I don’t think they’d really mind dropping to 44% of the time.
3. Typo in the structure section: and for Miami, the “rotation” locks into playing Clemson when they would not otherwise play. That should be FSU, not Clemson.
4. As you mentioned, the 3 pods can’t be perfect. I’d consider swapping Miami and UL so the Green is a true southern pod and thus split equally for everyone to have recruiting access. I know Miami has those BE ties, but it’s been more than a decade for them while UL just came from the BE.
LikeLike
*warning: lengthy reply coming*
I agree that the ACC doesn’t really want to go to 9 games. The primary problem with not going to 9 games in a league with a bunch of protected rivalry games is what they’re dealing with now, namely that you’re going to have some teams not play each other for quite a long time.
In this particular model, you can push it back to 8 games, but that gets some awkward fits. Most notably, the green group already has eight games locked each year (three against each other, plus five against red or blue). This doesn’t seem like a problem, except that you still need to make Miami-FSU into an annual game (unless you think they’d be ok making it OOC when they rotate off, which I doubt).
The only way to make THAT fit is to then relax the requirement that green is a full intra-group round robin. The only real way you can make that work is to say that every year, every green team plays 2/3 other green teams and one extra red/blue team (FSU-Miami locks, of course). Whether you make this that green is two sub-pairs of permanent “rivals”, or some weird rotation is kind of arbitrary; Clemson fits well against both FSU and GT as annual matchups, so you can make a case either. For simplicity, let’s say you set it up so that Clemson-FSU are in the same sub-group and play each other annually, ditto Lville-GT, and then they switch off which of the other greens they play (two years Clemson plays Lville and FSU GT, then they flip-flop).
So you have:
FSU/Clemson: two green games, five red/blue games, one flex game that locks into Miami/NC St alternatively (more below on why this makes it easier/simpler)
Lville/GT: two green games, five red/blue games, one flex game vs blue/red
UVA: four red games, one VT game, two green games, and one flex vs blue (it probably makes it simpler to foreclose on the possibility of rotating in a green game)
VT: flip side of UVA
NC St: four red games, two green games, one flex vs blue, and a second game vs either Clemson or an additional blue team
Miami: flip side of NC St
UNC/Duke/Wake: four red games, two green games, one flex vs blue, and a second game vs
either a green or blue team
Pitt/Syr/BC: four blue games, two green games, one flex vs red, and a second game vs either a green or red team
You then (I think) have a situation where:
Lville/GT have a three-set rotation against UNC/Duke/Wake and Pitt/Syr/BC;
Clemson plays NC St when they’re up and otherwise (I think) flexes a four-set rotationagainst Pitt/Syr/BC/Miami;
FSU plays Miami when they’re up and otherwise (I think) flexes a four-set rotation against UNC/Duke/NC St/Wake
UNC/Duke/NC St/Wake have some kind of weird four-set rotation against Pitt/Syr/BC/Miami, where NC St / Miami (I think) have fewer aviailable blue-red slots than all the others
and then down the rabbit hole you go
If you’re going to dump the 9-game trait, I think you actually have to go with an entirely different structure to make this all work. I THINK (but am not 100%) that you can make an 8-game schedule work (awkwardly) with a four-group setup of:
Red: UNC/Duke/NCSt/Wake
Blue: Pitt/Syr/BC/Miami
Yellow: UVA/VT/Lville
Green: Clem/FSU/GT
where for 2 years all reds play all yellows and all blues play all greens, then the next two years all reds play all greens and all blues play all yellows, then they go back and forth. Not 100% but I THINK that structure can work in a reasonable way, though a lot probably depends on just which inter-group games are actually mandatory (UNC-UVA? NC St – Clem? VT-anyone from blue? etc) and which are “well we’ll do it if it makes it all easier”
PS Somewhat surprisingly, Clemson-NC St actually makes the fits EASIER, mainly because it balances the (presumably) absolutely mandatory Miami-FSU game). In the 9 game setup, if Miami-FSU AND Clemson-NC St are each annual games, then every 2 home-away cycles (or 4 years total), then you have one extra set each between Duke/UNC/Wake and Lville/FSU/GT, and one game each between Pitt/Syr/BC and Lville/Clem/GT, and then you rotate the whole thing around for 12 years (thus it’s a large 12 year rotation).
If you take away Clemson-NC St, then in each group of 2 home-away cycles you get an extra set between Pitt/Syr/BC and Lville/Clem/GT (because Miami/FSU is locked into getting the extra matchup), but you also get an extra set between Duke/UNC/Wake/NCSt and Lville/FSU/Clem/GT (because Clem/NCSt is NOT locked in). Which then means that to balance the whole thing you need to go to a 24-year cycle. Which is doable but messier than the above example.
LikeLike
I agree that the ACC doesn’t really want to go to 9 games. The primary problem with not going to 9 games in a league with a bunch of protected rivalry games is what they’re dealing with now, namely that you’re going to have some teams not play each other for quite a long time.
In this particular model, you can push it back to 8 games, but that gets some awkward fits. Most notably, the green group already has eight games locked each year (three against each other, plus five against red or blue).
It seems to me that this is a problem largely of your own invention. You’ve created a structure in which 8 games is an awkward fit, having decided a priori that you were going to have 9 games.
I agree with Brian: due to the ACC’s locked non-conference rivalries and the Notre Dame deal, they will not go to 9 games. If you begin with that assumption, there are plenty of alternatives besides the one you chose.
LikeLike
You also noted that you can grossly simplify it by swapping Miami and Lville as you suggested. Given that Miami was in the Big East for a lot longer than Lville was, AND that two of the old Big East teams (BC/VT) went to the ACC along with Miami, I’m not sure that it’d work out very well politically. But mechanically, yes that does simplify it a lot. Miami in the green group, Lville in the blue, dump ALL inter-group rivalries except UVA/VT, and you have a lot fewer things to juggle.
UVA/VT still does complicate it a bit, and you still probably get FSU/Clemson as two years on, two years off (which I doubt that people want to see), but it can work in an 8-game structure. It’s just that you’ll have to make a bunch of compromises to make it all hash out.
LikeLike
Matthew Smith,
“You also noted that you can grossly simplify it by swapping Miami and Lville as you suggested.”
Yep. And simpler is almost always better (to me, at least).
“Given that Miami was in the Big East for a lot longer than Lville was, AND that two of the old Big East teams (BC/VT) went to the ACC along with Miami, I’m not sure that it’d work out very well politically.”
On the other hand, Miami was only in the BE for 14 years and has been out for 10 years. Miami has alumni ties to the northeast, but the Big East ties aren’t very strong.
“But mechanically, yes that does simplify it a lot. Miami in the green group, Lville in the blue, dump ALL inter-group rivalries except UVA/VT, and you have a lot fewer things to juggle.”
Exactly my point.
“UVA/VT still does complicate it a bit, and you still probably get FSU/Clemson as two years on, two years off (which I doubt that people want to see), but it can work in an 8-game structure. It’s just that you’ll have to make a bunch of compromises to make it all hash out.”
In my version, the Green teams all play each other so Clemson/FSU is locked.
LikeLike
This guy seems to think he’s stumbled about some legit insider Big Ten expansion news yesterday:
LikeLike
It’s entertaining to read, but hard to believe.
LikeLike
Has the tweet been removed? I don’t see anything about Big Ten expansion.
LikeLike
Its in the tweets circa April 17 – however there are no links to other reports or blogs discussing it. If there is mutual interest on the part of MU (and to a degree KU and OU wrt West Virginia) it could reflect the realities of travel hardships for non-revenue teams. More likely is the fact the ACC through its sponsor ESPN has become more resolute toward maintaining its presence and broadcast inventory. Maybe the ACC (or SEC now with 13 i/o 14) also makes a play for Texas and in turn the scraps fall into the SEC, B1G, and Pac.
LikeLike
If ESPN is so committed to the ACC, when does the standalone ACCN appear and how much does ESPN pay for it?
And if ESPN is going to chase all/most of the B10’s rights in 2017 anyway, how would protecting the ACC to hurt the B10 make sense to them financially? The B10 would be a bigger investment for them.
And how does MO and the musical chairs it would set up fit into this? I highly doubt they want to leave the SEC so soon, especially since they’ve had success there. Would the SEC replace them with WV? Since when are B12 teams free to escape their GOR? If not WV, then whom?
And that still ignores the B10 needing a 16th (unless they plan to drop divisions). And whether these new additions can pay for themselves.
LikeLike
At 15 schools either an 8 or 10 game conference schedule would be necessary for every team to play an equal number of conference games.
LikeLike
The gist seems to be that the Big Ten has finally accepted that they can’t raid the ACC anymore, so their next priority is to woo Mizzou away from the SEC. No idea who this guy is or if he has any credibility. If it were true though it would be interesting to see what the Big Ten could offer that would be able to lure Mizzou away from the SEC. The SEC has been very generous to Mizzou and Mizzou is prospering there. That said, the Big Ten is a more natural fit institutionally and culturally.
LikeLike
The gist seems to be that the Big Ten has finally accepted that they can’t raid the ACC anymore, so their next priority is to woo Mizzou away from the SEC.
But those tweets make it fairly clear that Missouri would be part of a two-fer that would include either Kansas or Oklahoma. Even if you assume that strategy and Missouri’s willingness to play along, how do you get Kansas or Oklahoma out of the Big XII before the GORs expire (or are near expiration), on terms that make financial sense?
Furthermore, there is no reason for the Big Ten to “finally accept that they can’t raid the ACC anymore,” particularly if the alleged reason is that ESPN won’t let the ACC fail. Until ESPN actually follows through, there’s no reason to make assumptions, one way or the other. A lot can change in the next 7–10 years.
LikeLike
I thought I read in the tweets that these three schools (Mizz, Ok, and Kansas) would be pursued in 7 to 8 years. Wouldn’t that be toward the end of B12 GOR?
LikeLike
Did OU get secretly admitted to AAU?
LikeLike
I thought I read in the tweets that these three schools (Mizz, Ok, and Kansas) would be pursued in 7 to 8 years. Wouldn’t that be toward the end of B12 GOR?
It said they’re targeting 2017, which coincides with the timing of the new TV contract.
LikeLike
“Did OU get secretly admitted to AAU?”
Highly unlikely that AAU would have secret admissions. Also highly unlikely that they would admit Oklahoma.
Now, you might argue that if there was a way to admit Oklahoma secretly, without the news getting out, that might improve Oklahoma’s chances slightly, but then it wouldn’t be any good for getting into the Big Ten.
LikeLike
BruceMcF:
That was an oblique way of saying OU isn’t getting invited anytime soon, if ever.
LikeLike
“That was an oblique way of saying OU isn’t getting invited anytime soon, if ever.”
Rinse and repeat.
LikeLike
http://www.dailytargum.com/article/2015/04/rutgers-athletics-loses-more-than-36-million-last-fiscal-year
What’s the value of joining a better conference?
The University’s 40 percent increase in admissions applications from international students can be attributed to greater name recognition from Rutgers’ presence in the Big Ten, Barchi said.
Admissions applications increased by about 14 percent during the last application cycle, Barchi said. About 15 or 16 percent of applications were from students living outside of the Garden State, and much of that figure represents a Midwest demographic.
“Rutgers is getting a huge collateral value out of the advertising and the buzz of being in the Big Ten,” he said. “If we were to not remain in the Big Ten, we would have a monumental financial disaster on our hands. So we’re very conscious of that.”
Rutgers’ increased global presence from Big Ten membership increases revenue to do what is necessary to prevent tuition hikes, Barchi said. Administrators also feel the need to satisfy the University’s alumni base, composed of many who are interested in intercollegiate sports.
LikeLike
Nice Iowa State logo on their graphic.
LikeLike
I guess he is right about athletic spending harming Rutgers academics. They have a first year journalism student thinking Midwest students are “international.”
LikeLike
What’s Iowa’s national anthem?
LikeLike
http://digital.lib.uiowa.edu/cdm/ref/collection/sheetmusic/id/51
Pretty sure it’s this. “Iowa Corn Song”
http://www.netstate.com/states/symb/song/ia_corn_song.htm
Lyrics:
Let’s sing of Grand old I-O-Way,
Yo-Ho, yo-ho, yo-ho
Our love is strong-er ev-‘ry day,
Yo-Ho, yo-ho, yo-ho
So come a-long and join the throng,
Sev-‘ral hun-dred thou-sand strong
As you come just sing this song,
Yo-Ho, yo-ho, yo-ho
We’re from I-O-way, I-O-way.
State of all the land,
Joy on ev-‘ry hand.
We’re from I-O-way, I-O-way.
That’s where the tall corn grows
Our land is full of ripe-ning corn,
Yo-Ho, yo-ho, yo-ho
We’ve watched it grow both night and morn,
Yo-Ho, yo-ho, yo-ho
But now we rest, we’ve stood the test.
All that’s good we have the best
I-O-way has reached the crest,
Yo-Ho, yo-ho, yo-ho
We’re from I-O-way, I-O-way.
State of all the land,
Joy on ev-‘ry hand.
We’re from I-O-way, I-O-way.
That’s where the tall corn grows
We’re from I-O-way, I-O-way.
State of all the land,
Joy on ev-‘ry hand.
We’re from I-O-way, I-O-way.
That’s where the tall corn grows
A music video of it.
LikeLike
I kid, I kid
LikeLike
Though does it actually say that?
“The University’s 40 percent increase in admissions applications from international students can be attributed to greater name recognition from Rutgers’ presence in the Big Ten, Barchi said.
Admissions applications increased by about 14 percent during the last application cycle, Barchi said. About 15 or 16 percent of applications were from students living outside of the Garden State, and much of that figure represents a Midwest demographic.”
“Much of that figure represents a Midwest demographic” and “International applications were up to 40%” can both be true at the same time.
LikeLike
College baseball update (4/20).
LSU took its rightful place in the top spot of every poll/ranking today setting up a #1 versus #2 matchup this weekend against the Aggies in Baton Rouge. I’ll only be able to make two of the games because on Saturday I’ll be in Birmingham for the Southern Conference Track Championships watching my son as he throws javelin for The Citadel. (Proud dad mode off and now back to baseball).
Like most weeks, the polls/rankings are fairly consistent at the top and then go crazy. The consensus top four are LSU, A&M, UCLA and Louisville.
Franks’s Illinois Fighting Illini lead the rankings for the B1G and are as high as #8 in the USAT coaches poll. The only poll that doesn’t have Illinois in the top 10 is Collegiate Baseball (#13). Iowa and Maryland are ranked by all six polls/rankings. Iowa is as high as #17 (CB) and as low as #29 (NCBWA). Maryland is as high as #18 (USAT) and as low as #21 (CB, BA & NCBWA). Nebraska is ranked #25 by Perfect Game and #26 by NCBWA.
Regarding attendance, LSU remains #1 with an average of 10,613. The SEC owns the top 5 spots for attendance, with #2 Ole Miss (7,837), #3 Arkansas (7,656), #4 Miss State (7,389), and #5 South Carolina (7,310).
Texas tops the B-XII and is #6 overall with an average attendance of 5,431.
Florida State tops the ACC and is #8 overall with an average attendance of 4,388.
Nebraska tops the B1G and is #10 overall with an average attendance of 4,086.
Arizona State tops the Pac-12 and is #16 overall with an average attendance of 3,281.
Indiana may not be ranked but fans are still going to see the Hoosiers are a clip 2,276 per game, to rank #30 nationally.
LikeLike
http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/baseball/bracketology
These guys have IL, IA, UMD, NE and OSU all making the field of 64 right now with IL hosting a regional.
8 SEC schools would get in with 4 being national seeds.
LikeLike
College baseball update (4/27).
LSU took two of three against A&M this weekend in the first ever #1 v. #2 matchup at Alex Box Stadium. Its probably my fault that LSU didn’t sweep. I was there to cheer on the Tigers in their wins on Thursday and Friday nights. I couldn’t make the Saturday game as I was attending the Southern Conference outdoor track and field championships in Birmingham.
My son placed 7th in the javelin competition, scored points for The Citadel, and earned a letter as a D-1 athlete in his Freshman year. His PR this season ranks as the second best mark by a Freshman in Citadel history.
I’m a proud Dad!
LikeLike
Congrats, Alan.
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/baseball/polls/coaches-poll/
7. IL
19. IA
21. UMD
25. OSU
33. NE
LikeLike
Congrats!
Saw the last few innings of Thursday’s game on the Duce. That was clutch.
LikeLike
Penn State trustees sue to get Freeh report documents
http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20150421_Penn_State_trustees_sue_to_get_Freeh_report_documents.html
There are good reasons(*) why the actual results of Freeh’s investigation are being hidden from some trustees.
(*) “The fiduciary duty is an obligation of loyalty and good faith to someone or some entity that is the highest duty known to the law. It requires a degree of loyalty and care that does not allow any violation without exposing the violator to personal liability.” (http://www.stimmel-law.com/retainer/The_Fiduciary_Duty.html)
LikeLike
The Future of Binge TV Belongs to America’s Oldest Sport
HBO Now is the network’s response to the rage induced by HBO Go constantly dropping streams last year during Thrones and new episodes of True Detective.
[snip]
[HBO NOW’s] infrastructure didn’t belong to Netflix or Time Warner or some other expected broadcast conglomerate. It was Major League Baseball’s.
MLB Advanced Media, which has arguably the country’s most extensive and experienced broadband network for streaming live video, has been around since 2000 and is equally owned by the 30 MLB clubs. In addition to streaming most baseball games (more on that later), it handles the back-end duties for myriad other major sports. BAM, as it’s known in industry parlance, powers ESPN’s watch-anywhere app. It runs Turner Sports’ March Madness streaming. The World Wrestling Entertainment Network contracts out its $10-a-month service into BAM’s capable hands. Sony depends on BAM for PlayStation Vue streaming service.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121596/major-league-baseballs-mlb-advanced-media-quiet-digital-giant
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25157011/pac-12-study-reveals-athletes-too-exhausted-to-study-effectively
P12 study shows their athletes spend 50 hours per week on their sport on average. That’s with an official cap of 20 mandatory hours (it averaged 21 in the P12, though). The biggest complaint was not getting enough sleep.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12735307/big-12-coaches-discuss-pros-cons-potential-conference-title-game
Multiple B12 coaches about a CCG on the spring B12 teleconference.
For – Snyder, Holgerson, Kingsbury
For only if it helps to get teams into the playoff – Stoops, Patterson
Against – Rhoads, Strong, Gundy, Briles
It sounds like if the CFP committee makes it clear that a CCG matters, then the B12 will add one. Otherwise, they won’t.
According to the reporter’s twitter stream, Briles also believes that Baylor’s OOC schedule had nothing to do with OSU being ahead of them.
As a fan noted on twitter, the VT team OSU played in 2014 would’ve been the best team Baylor faced OOC since UConn in 2009 (according to Sagarin rankings, I believe).
LikeLike
Also, money. A CCG is clearly worth a pretty penny to TV. And coaches don’t make ALL the decisions (even if sometimes it seems like they do).
LikeLike
I’m not sure how much that one is worth with the caveat that you have a guaranteed rematch every year. Even if they got Big Ten money in the range of $20-25 million they’ve got to decide whether the risks are worth the ~$2 million reward there. Last year’s situation is likely an outlier in that you had two teams both right on the cusp of the playoff that may have benefited from a game.
LikeLike
If a CCG would pay a cool $20–25 million, then I suspect the Big XII will not be able to resist. University presidents prefer steady income streams over the vagaries of revenue that can go up or down from year to year, depending on which post-season games you qualified for.
We’ll need a few more years of data, before we know whether a CCG would help the Big XII competitively. In borderline cases, a CCG can propel a marginal candidate into the playoff, as it clearly did for Ohio State last year. But it also gives a team that’s safely in the top four another opportunity to lose.
Last year, there were six compelling playoff candidates, including at least one from every P5 conference. In many seasons, at least one of the P5 has a weak (multi-loss) champion. In years like that, if the Big XII had a 12-0 or 11-1 round-robin champion, they’d have nothing to gain by playing a CCG.
Even last year, the question is murky. TCU was ahead of Ohio State going into the final week of the season. Therefore, you’d have to think that if they’d beaten Baylor in a CCG, they would’ve stayed ahead, and gone to the playoff ahead of the Buckeyes.
But Ohio State was ahead of Baylor going into the final week. If they both win — OSU over Wisconsin, Baylor over TCU — there’s a pretty good chance that OSU remains ahead, so the extra game does Baylor no good.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“If a CCG would pay a cool $20–25 million, then I suspect the Big XII will not be able to resist. University presidents prefer steady income streams over the vagaries of revenue that can go up or down from year to year, depending on which post-season games you qualified for.”
This may very well come down to the presidents overruling the coaches.
“We’ll need a few more years of data, before we know whether a CCG would help the Big XII competitively. In borderline cases, a CCG can propel a marginal candidate into the playoff, as it clearly did for Ohio State last year. But it also gives a team that’s safely in the top four another opportunity to lose.”
I don’t think we really need more data. There have been a lot of P5 CCGs and plenty of seasons of CFB to see how conference races go. The only new data that would really help would be if the committee clarified the importance of CCGs to them. Do they care about 13 vs 12? Do they value a CCG more than a regular season game that same day? Do they consider co-champs as equal to CCG winners? If yes, for both or just the head to head winner?
There are too many scenarios to easily decide whether a CCG is more helpful than hurtful overall, but here’s some data. I’ll define top 6 teams as CFP candidates:
SEC CCG record of #1-6: 18-9, 12-3 vs non-top 6 teams (23 years)
B12 CCG record of #1-6: 7-5, all vs non-top 6 teams (15 years)
ACC CCG record of #1-6: 3-2, all vs non-top 6 teams (10 years)
B10 CCG record of #1-6: 1-1, all vs non-top 6 teams (4 years)
P12 CCG record of #1-6: 1-0, all vs non-top 6 teams (4 years)
Overall: 30-17, 24-11 vs non-top 6 (0.686)
SEC: 12-3 vs non-top 6 (0.800)
All but SEC: 12-8 vs non-top 6 (0.600)
Fact 1: P5 conferences with a CCG had at least 1 top 6 team 41 out of 56 seasons (0.732)
So a CCG would be a non-issue 0.268 of the time since the CFP isn’t a consideration.
Fact 2: Those teams won the CCG 0.638 of the time (0.686 vs non-top 6, 0.600 for non-SEC)
A top 6 team would win the CCG in 0.439 of seasons.
0.439 + 0.268 = 0.707
So a CCG wouldn’t hurt in at least 71% of seasons based on history. A team could win the CCG and still get jumped or not move into the top 4, but it could also lose the CCG and not get jumped.
Since it’s well over a 50/50 split in terms of being better than not playing that 13th game, it’d seem like the B12 should do it given the chance.
LikeLike
I don’t think we really need more data. There have been a lot of P5 CCGs and plenty of seasons of CFB to see how conference races go. The only new data that would really help would be if the committee clarified the importance of CCGs to them. Do they care about 13 vs 12? Do they value a CCG more than a regular season game that same day? Do they consider co-champs as equal to CCG winners? If yes, for both or just the head to head winner?
That’s the data I meant: we don’t have much information about how the committee will react to a wider variety of selection scenarios.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“That’s the data I meant: we don’t have much information about how the committee will react to a wider variety of selection scenarios.”
The results will never really tell us more than we know now. Every year will be idiosyncratic enough to make drawing broad conclusions useless. Especially since the committee members change regularly. It would take an explicit statement from the committee on the this topic to provide useful data and they don’t seem inclined to make such announcements. I think they prefer the flexibility to do what they want.
LikeLike
Also remember, if a CCG is worth even just $15 million, a playoff access berth is worth just $6 million (and a “other BCS game” is worth $4 million) – see http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/revenue-distribution . So in terms of $ value to a league, a CCG is worth way more than a playoff berth, which is mainly because the bulk majority of each league’s post-season-related revenue is contractually fixed and does NOT vary based on how often teams actually make the playoffs.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12736663/georgetown-hoyas-maryland-terrapins-play-gavitt-tipoff-games-new-big-ten-big-east-series
The Gavitt Tipoff Games are out:
Georgetown at Maryland
Xavier at Michigan
Creighton at Indiana
Rutgers at St. John’s
Illinois at Providence
Nebraska at Villanova
Penn State at DePaul
Iowa at Marquette
All games are Nov. 17-20.
The only matchup that is confirmed for 2016 as a return is Maryland at Georgetown.
Important note:
There are already matchups between these conferences that are played on a regular basis — not part of this challenge — like DePaul-Northwestern, Creighton-Nebraska, Wisconsin-Marquette, Seton Hall-Rutgers and, on a rotational basis, Indiana-Butler every other year in Indianapolis. Purdue-Butler, like Indiana-Butler, is played on an every other year basis as well.
There are 10 BE teams, so each will play 6+ times over the 8 years if they stick with 8 games. The 14 B10 teams all play at least 4 times.
Given that so many of the regional games are already played and that not all team are involved, this lineup is OK. GU @ UMD will be heated.
I’d mostly work in geographic pods, personally. IN, OSU, MI, MSU, PSU, UMD and RU vs Providence, Seton Hall, St. John’s, Villanova and Georgetown, NE, WI, IA, MN, NW, IL and PU vs Creighton, Marquette, DePaul, Butler and Xavier. Mix in a few crossovers, especially of the bigger brands (Georgetown vs MSU, etc) and/or teams closer to the middle of the footprint (OSU vs Xavier/Butler, etc).
LikeLike
Federal government strikes out. I always felt like the government’s pursuit of Barry Bond was personal and a waste of resources. 9th court of appeals rules 10-1 that there was insufficient evidence to charge him with obstruction of justice. If the justice department wants to continue to pursue him it must go to the Supreme Court. Bonds has already served his sentence.
http://www.mmercurynews.com/crime-court/ci_27967951/barry-bonds-conviction-overturned
LikeLike
He did it. He knows he did it. We all know he did it. I couldn’t possibly care less what the CoA has to say about it. And without the Bonds case, the rest of the Balco investigation never really happens and multiple felons get no punishment.
If all that resulted was that fans realized all these “heroes” were cheating like crazy, then it was worth the resources. People like Bonds are why junior high school kids are using steroids.
LikeLike
Reversal does not mean he is innocent. It means that there was insufficient evidence to find him guilty under the technical rules of the statute.
Among the many dubious things Barry Bonds did, he was ultimately found guilty only on a fairly minor point: giving a rambling answer to a simple question. The Court of Appeals had to decide whether it is obstruction of justice to give a rambling answer, when in the end he ultimately DID answer the question?
Their answer of “no” is probably correct, legally speaking. The court did not find Bonds innocent of using steroids. That question was not before them. The court also did not (and could not) review all of the perjury charges, on which the jury acquitted him, for whatever reason.
LikeLike
You don’t seem to understand the constitution. There’s no double jeopardy. If you are not guilty, its done. The government can’t appeal or try you again. That’s one of the basic foundations of our justice system.
And it does mean he is not guilty. Its a very strong not guilty. Not only is he not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but there was not sufficient evidence to possibly reach that conclusion. And the appeals court basically said what he did wasn’t even a crime.
As to Brian’s point, he wasn’t tried on using illegal drugs. That is what was so offensive about this case. It was an abuse of government power and a misuse of resources. They couldn’t (or didn’t want to) get him on something he actually did, so they made something up when he was really a minor figure in the actual crime being committed.
LikeLike
You don’t seem to understand the constitution. There’s no double jeopardy. If you are not guilty, its done. The government can’t appeal or try you again.
What did I say, that leads you to believe I don’t understand these very basic elementary things?
And it does mean he is not guilty. Its a very strong not guilty. Not only is he not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but there was not sufficient evidence to possibly reach that conclusion. And the appeals court basically said what he did wasn’t even a crime.
Here, the misunderstanding is yours. “Not guilty” doesn’t mean “innocent”.
In our system of justice, we prefer to acquit guilty people, over the worse option of convicting innocent ones. This means the burden of proof is on the government. All “not guilty” means is that the government’s heavy burden wasn’t met.
I’m not saying Bonds couldn’t be innocent of all the original charges. Of course he could. But you can’t draw that inference from the fact that the Court of Appeals tossed out his conviction.
LikeLike
Sorry, I misspoke: the jury did not acquit him on the perjury charges. They failed to reach a verdict, and the government elected not to re-try him.
LikeLike
On a similar note, Pete Rose has been hired as a pre-game analyst for Fox.
LikeLike
Fine that he didnt bet the Reds to lose, but I wonder if over-use of Mario Soto and Tom Browning (whose careers ended with multiple injuries) could be attributed to the need to assure Reds victory or spreads on bets.
LikeLike
That could be said about nearly every pitcher in the majors. Pete had a couple of teammates in the early 70s-Wayne Simpson and Don Gullet-who may have become among the best pitchers in the game, but had very short careers.
Pete always wanted to win.
LikeLike
Pete new the rules. Gamble and you are banned from baseball. He then lied about it publicly for years despite the mountain of evidence. I’m perfectly fine with keeping him banned from baseball.
LikeLike
Agreed, except the HOF is not baseball. I wouldn’t feel conflicted for him to remain banned from any direct MLB controled activity, AND be admitted to the baseball writers HOF.
LikeLike
A Hall of Fame without Pete Rose is pretty ridiculous.
He broke an important rule, but no one who knows anything about him thinks he did anything to impact the integrity of the game.
LikeLike
He broke an important rule, but no one who knows anything about him thinks he did anything to impact the integrity of the game.
You don’t think betting on your own team to win impacts the integrity of the game?
As others have noted, when you have money riding on the game, you make strategic decisions differently than a manager who is following the rules.
This is without considering the fact that, to most of us, “integrity” means following the rules, even rules you don’t agree with, and even rules that you’ve convinced yourself have nothing to do with the game. Another meaning of “integrity” is to man up, once caught, instead of continuing to lie about it.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“You don’t think betting on your own team to win impacts the integrity of the game?”
No, I don’t. He’s supposed to try to win every game.
“As others have noted, when you have money riding on the game, you make strategic decisions differently than a manager who is following the rules.”
Correction – one might make different decisions if one wasn’t betting. You assume that he wasn’t so competitive that he’d do anything to win every game anyway.
“This is without considering the fact that, to most of us, “integrity” means following the rules, even rules you don’t agree with, and even rules that you’ve convinced yourself have nothing to do with the game. Another meaning of “integrity” is to man up, once caught, instead of continuing to lie about it.”
I’ll give you the second part, but plenty of people believe disobeying the rules can be done with integrity. UCLA/USC agreeing to each lose a timeout so they can both wear home uniforms. A player helping an injured opponent to finish a race, play, whatever. And outside of sports, it’s what protest groups do.
LikeLike
“As others have noted, when you have money riding on the game, you make strategic decisions differently than a manager who is following the rules.”
Correction – one might make different decisions if one wasn’t betting. You assume that he wasn’t so competitive that he’d do anything to win every game anyway.
He might be the unusual person whose behavior is utterly unaffected by having an extra, undisclosed, financial incentive riding on the game. But: because it is undisclosed, everyone else is deprived of the opportunity to assess whether his managerial strategy is affected. This would include the players whose careers are riding on his decisions.
And of course, even if you knew he was betting on the games and could detect no difference in the way he manages, it doesn’t mean there WAS no difference; it only means you couldn’t find any, which is a very different thing.
…plenty of people believe disobeying the rules can be done with integrity. UCLA/USC agreeing to each lose a timeout so they can both wear home uniforms. A player helping an injured opponent to finish a race, play, whatever. And outside of sports, it’s what protest groups do.
Sure, but in each of those cases, the flaunting of rules is done in broad daylight, so that all of us can decide for ourselves whether their actions make them more or less honorable. We can’t do that when the violator works in secret, and in fact, goes out of his way to try to evade discovery.
LikeLike
Which is why I agreed with your second point. It’s not breaking the rules that costs you your integrity, it’s why you do it and whether you try to hide it.
LikeLike
BYU head football coach Bronco Mendenhall, echoing his boss a couple of months ago, says that the school really wants to be in a P5 conference.
As in, please, pretty please, with sugar on top. As in, here’s a gift-wrapped big wet kiss for the pretty girl down the block named “Big XII”. (BYU keeps saying P5, knowing full well that the Big XII is the only one that is even remotely likely.)
It can be reckless to give a deadline, when you are practically powerless to make it happen, but Mendenhall does just that:
As I noted in another post, CCG de-regulation could both hurt and help BYU. It hurts, because the Big XII would be able to stage the extra game without expanding. But it helps, because the Big XII could consider stopping at 11 teams. Under current rules, expansion only makes sense in pairs, and there is certainly no available 12th school as valuable as BYU.
The question is whether BYU is valuable enough on its own to be #11, and to overcome the scheduling problems inherent in adding members (i.e., less access to Texas for all of the non-Texas schools).
LikeLike
Are Bronco and Holmoe trying to influence internal decisions/direction? I can’t see public statements having any possible effect on the B12 leadership’s potential receptivity.
LikeLike
Are Bronco and Holmoe trying to influence internal decisions/direction
My guess is a lot of this is for recruiting. It is to BYU’s advantage to make people think that BYU will be in a power conference shortly. It allows them to compete with the western P5 schools and differentiate themselves from MWC schools. I expect to see something like this every summer.
LikeLike
The downside, of course, is that when you say it needs to happen within 3 years, what happens in 3 years when it hasn’t happened yet?
LikeLike
How many of today’s 14 year olds will remember that three year comment when they start to get recruited the summer before their senior year? What they’ll hear is a BYU official telling them BYU is *this* close to joining.
LikeLike
Louisville recruits reported coaches claiming they were going to the Big 12.
Temple recruits reported coaches were telling them they were joining a P5 conference.
There was even a Texas recruit (according to a message board poster who knew his coach and wasn’t prone to making things up) told by an FSU coach that they were coming to the Big 12.
LikeLike
And FAU in the Howard era said they were going Big East.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“As I noted in another post, CCG de-regulation could both hurt and help BYU. It hurts, because the Big XII would be able to stage the extra game without expanding. But it helps, because the Big XII could consider stopping at 11 teams. Under current rules, expansion only makes sense in pairs, and there is certainly no available 12th school as valuable as BYU.
The question is whether BYU is valuable enough on its own to be #11, and to overcome the scheduling problems inherent in adding members (i.e., less access to Texas for all of the non-Texas schools).”
Another key consideration is whether the B12 wants to move past a round robin schedule. With 11 teams, they aren’t going to play all 10 other teams. Would they use the old B10 model and play 8 games and miss 2 teams or stick with 9? The big issue will be games in TX for recruiting purposes, as usual. The B10 locked 2 teams and rotated 6 of the other 8, but everyone will want at least 1 TX team locked.
UT – OU, WV
TT – OkSU, KSU
TCU – BYU, ISU
Baylor – KU
Then you need to lock rivalries:
UT – OU, WV, Baylor, TT, TCU
TT – OkSU, KSU, UT, TCU, Baylor
TCU – BYU, ISU, Baylor, UT, TT
Baylor – KU, UT, TCU, TT
also KU/KSU, OU/OkSU, ISU/KSU
UT – OU, WV, Baylor, TT, TCU
TT – OkSU, KSU, UT, TCU, Baylor
TCU – BYU, ISU, Baylor, UT, TT
Baylor – KU, UT, TCU, TT
ISU – TCU, KSU
KU – Baylor, KSU
KSU – TT, ISU, KU
OU – UT, OkSU
OkSU – TT, OU
WV – UT
BYU – TCU
That’s 3 schools with 5 locked games, 1 with 4 locked, 1 with 3 locked, 4 with 2 locked and 2 with 1 locked.
I’d probably add some more, like WV/BYU (2 good brands, both newbies and outsiders, gets everyone to at least 2 locked games). Then the B12 would have to decide if they want to work the rotation from there or equalize the numbers of locked games more.
LikeLike
I’m not sure you’d really need to lock any specific games other than the obvious ones. If you play 8 then you just drop two (assuming BYU add), and there are four teams in Texas. So you’d probably just make sure that the rotation rules say you can’t drop more than one Texas team in a year, and then make sure you that you don’t happen to have all three home or all three away.
For someone like KSU you might do (in odd years):
Annual – vs KU, @ ISU (then flip in even years)
2 home, 1 away (then flip in even years) – against WVU, BYU, OK, OK St
1 home, 2 away (then flip in even years) – against UT, TT, BU, TCU
The actual mechanics would be messier for various reasons, but that strikes me as at a high level a pretty clear and reasonable rotation structure. Logistically, the bigger thing that gets messy is just juggling how far away WVU and BYU are, and how you deal withe their travel issues.
Personally, I REALLY doubt that BYU will ever be valuable enough on its own for #11, especially now that you don’t need 12 for a CCG. Certainly I don’t expect it to happen anytime soon. Texas and Oklahoma are already pretty obviously financially carrying the rest of the league; I can’t imagine they’d be happy with adding more mouths to feed, almost no matter who those other teams are.
BYU probably compares reasonably well to the bottom end of the Big 12, but I really don’t think that’s the comparison point for any league other than when they’re desperate to expand (Pac-12 needing a 12th, ACC and Big 12 worried about collapse, etc.).
LikeLike
“BYU probably compares reasonably well to the bottom end of the Big 12, but I really don’t think that’s the comparison point for any league other than when they’re desperate to expand (Pac-12 needing a 12th, ACC and Big 12 worried about collapse, etc.).”
Yes … that is a rationale for a 12th when a compelling 11th presents itself and a conference is looking at whether it can “even up” … not a rationale for an 11th.
LikeLike
Nine conference games aren’t possible in 11 team conferences. Someone needs to be playing 8 or 10 in that case.
LikeLike
In addition to the money, their is still the fact that adding BYU as anything but a FB only member would be a scheduling nightmare.
They have a hard enough time with WVU, which is both geographically isolated and far away from major airports. Adding a school in Provo that refuses to play Sundays would be even worse.
LikeLike
To further frug’s point, adding BYU is basically adding another WV in the other direction.
– BYU is ~150 miles closer to Austin than WVU
– BYU is ~20 miles closer to Norman than WVU
– BYU is ~250 farther from Ames, IA than WVU
FWIW – BYU is ~50 miles from Salt Lake’s airport. Morgantown, WV is about ~75 miles from Pittsburgh’s.
LikeLike
If the AAC continues to suck then UConn in 2 to 3 years will reconsider its commitment to having a losing FBS football program and approach the Big East about membership.
LikeLike
Rolling three years 🙂
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25160428/study-uab-was-ill-advised-to-cut-football-bowling-rifle
The University of Alabama at Birmingham’s decision to end football, bowling and rifle was “ill advised from a net cash-flow perspective,” according to a study released Thursday by a consulting firm fired by UAB last month to perform this task.
In another twist to the saga surrounding the first major college football program cut in two decades, anonymous UAB football boosters paid $20,000 to help California-based consultant OSKR complete its study. UAB, which has another consultant currently working on a study, now has a 156-page report from OSKR’s Daniel Rascher and Andy Schwarz in the public domain that may serve as another voice in the contentious debate.
Last month, a UAB athletics task force unanimously selected OSKR to reevaluate the decision to eliminate football, bowling and rifle. UAB administrators quickly canceled the work by OSKR, claiming the firm’s study would be biased because of articles written by Schwarz critical of UAB’s decision last December to end football.
…
OSKR views standard athletic department accounting differently than some other consultants, calling the practice “poor insight” into how sports programs financially impact universities. Some conclusions by OSKR:
• Football, bowling and rifle at UAB were “effectively break-even to slightly positive” financially. OSKR’s reasoning: Athletic scholarships cost UAB far less than their listed prices, and Conference USA membership is far superior financially to any other possible non-FBS conference.
• Anticipated improvements in football ticket sales and new College Football Playoff revenue would outpace UAB’s new expenses from Cost of Attendance stipends and unlimited food allowances. OSKR estimated the annual surplus from football, bowling and rifle would exceed $500,000.
• OSKR recommended UAB supporters should commit to providing $1.2 million annually to cover the new cost of attendance stipends and anticipated debt service for desired facilities improvements.
• Travel expenses for UAB’s men’s and women’s basketball teams in a new conference could increase by about $320,000, and the total for all sports could exceed $1 million.
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/04/22/jameis-winston-crab-legs-nfl-combine
Now Jameis Winston claims a Publix employee gave him the crab legs for free.
There are so many problems with this story:
1. It’s an NCAA violation and so could cost his team wins.
2. It means he lied to the police during the investigation.
3. No grocery store employee can give you free food. You still have to walk past the register and he did.
4. He’s implicating that employee as a thief.
LikeLike
There are other QBs. Any NFL GM who drafts him is crazy. Just asking for trouble.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/118290/seven-abcespn-night-games-added-to-15-b1g-slate
ABC/ESPN released their early night game schedule (channel TBA except TCU/MN is on ESPN). BTN released theirs earlier. Here’s the combined schedule:
Sept. 3
TCU at Minnesota, 9 p.m. – ESPN
Sept. 4
Kent State at Illinois* – BTN
Sept. 12
South Alabama at Nebraska – BTN
Oregon at Michigan State, 8 p.m. – ABC/ESPN
Sept. 19
Rutgers at Penn State – BTN
Sept. 26
Hawaii at Wisconsin – BTN
Oct. 3
Michigan at Maryland – BTN
Oct. 10
Michigan State at Rutgers – BTN
Oct. 17
Penn State at Ohio State, 8 p.m. – ABC/ESPN
Oct. 24
Ohio State at Rutgers, 8 p.m. – ABC/ESPN
Oct. 31
Michigan at Minnesota, 8 p.m. – ABC/ESPN
Nov. 7
Michigan State at Nebraska, 7 or 8 p.m. – ABC/ESPN
Minnesota at Ohio State, 7 or 8 p.m. – ABC/ESPN
Nov. 14
Minnesota at Iowa – BTN
Thoughts:
The Nov. 21 game between Michigan State and Ohio State is conspicuously absent. But the Buckeyes are playing under the lights four times this year, including their opener on Labor Day at Virginia Tech. Ohio State also will be playing at night in three straight games from Oct. 17 through Nov. 7 (the Buckeyes are off on Oct. 31). So it’s understandable why the school might have had its fill of prime time for the year.
This schedule shows Minnesota’s raised profile nationally. The Thursday night opener against TCU, which is likely to start the year ranked No. 2, should be quite an event. Michigan also will be a night game at TCF Bank Stadium, while the Gophers go the ‘Shoe a week later in prime time. And Minnesota-Iowa is at night this year. A couple of upsets on these stages would do wonders for the program.
Speaking of Minnesota-Ohio State, the night of Nov. 7 could be outstanding with Michigan State also visiting Nebraska in the prime-time window. The Spartans’ Week 2 showdown against Oregon was a no-brainer for a night kickoff and it should be epic.
No night games at Michigan this year, which isn’t a surprise. Wisconsin is absent, other than a BTN game against Hawaii early in the year. No ESPN/ABC night games at Beaver Stadium, either, though Rutgers is playing at Penn State in prime time on BTN on Sept. 19.
All in all, there will be three November night games in the Big Ten this season. It’s a welcome change and the league could probably stand to do even more.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12747890/rose-bowl-not-bid-cfp-title-game-host
The Rose Bowl won’t bid for the NCG any time soon.
“The Tournament of Roses met with multiple civic, sports, tourism groups and leaders in the Los Angeles area to explore the possibility of bidding on the College Football Playoff National Championship Game,” the organization said in a statement. “After carefully reviewing the request for proposal, we have determined our structure is incompatible with the bid requirements.”
The statement also indicated that the Rose Bowl would assess whether to bid on any future title games.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/04/23/trying-to-make-army-navy-fit-in-playoff-selection-schedule/26226947/
What to do about the Army-Navy game will be one of the major topics of discussion at the CFP meeting next week.
Heading into next week’s College Football Playoff meetings in North Texas, what to do about the Army-Navy game seems to be the most vexing issue facing those in charge of the postseason system.
With Navy joining the American Athletic Conference this season, the Midshipmen are now eligible to earn a bid to a New Year’s Six bowl as the best-ranked champion from among the AAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt, Conference USA and Mid-American Conference.
The playoff selection committee sets the bowl lineup on Dec. 6, but Navy’s regular season doesn’t end until it plays Army on Dec. 12. If nothing changes, the Army-Navy game wouldn’t count toward the final rankings — which is a problem, especially with a $4 million bowl bid on the line.
“It’s a challenging issue and it’s a system-wide issue and it has me concerned,” MAC Commissioner Jon Steinbrecher said.
American Athletic Conference Commissioner Mike Aresco has been working to find a solution that allows Army-Navy to keep its late date while also giving the academies a chance to be in the mix for a marquee bowl bid.
“It is on the agenda and the commissioners know they have some scenarios from me, from our group, that we think work,” said Aresco, who declined to share details of his proposals.
LikeLike
Comcast announced today they are giving up on the Time-Warner merger.
LikeLike
Instead, Charter will try to buy TWC. Combined, those two are still smaller than Comcast.
Meanwhile, DirectTV and AT&T are still likely to merge.
It’s all about the broadband access. Comcast + TWC would have been about 55% of all broadband subscribers in the US under 1 roof.
LikeLike
Indeed, the DirectTV / AT&T merger could have been the most immediate beneficiary of the proposed Comcast / TWC merger …
… since having one obvious oppose decision on a big merger on their plate could well have make the Justice department a bit reluctant to oppose another one at the same time where the degree of concentration does not make the decision as cut and dried.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25161786/todd-graham-scheduling-four-easy-wins-is-un-american
Todd Graham wants tougher schedules in CFB.
“We need to consider what the fans want,” Graham said, according to AZFamily.com. “Fans don’t want to see you schedule four easy wins, then get two conference wins to get into a bowl game. That’s un-American.”
You’ll notice that even before calling 6-6 (2-6) bowl teams de facto enemies of the state, Graham specifically mentions scheduling four certain victories … when the Sun Devils’ Pac-12 only allows for a maximum of three, of course. Graham had plenty to say about that, too.
“Everybody should play nine conference games,” he said. “Why nine games instead of eight? Because you play one more conference game that your fans want to see instead of scheduling a team that no one wants to see because you’re scheduling wins and don’t want to be out of the four-team playoff.”
LikeLike
And, of course, the loyal American Pac12 and Big12 in the nine game club will shortly be rejoined by the Big Ten, after the Big Ten spent something around three decades in the un-American wilderness of only playing eight conference games.
Making for a Pac12/BigTen coalition on one side of the issue with the SEC on the other side of the issue. Hmmm … how surprising that an issue in college FB would shake out that way.
LikeLike
In all fairness, the SEC is now requiring at least one P5 non-conference game, and four SEC programs play one of these annually with an in-state ACC rival. The B1G, Pac-12, and Big XII all play nine conference games, but they don’t require any additional P5 games.
LikeLike
In ALL fairness … the “requirement” to play at least one P5 schools OOC doesn’t seem to kick in until the same season that the Big Ten moves to 9 conference games, with schools being pressed to play a 10th game OOC against a P5 peer … since this coming season its three to four SEC schools skipping out on playing a P5 school (One Mississippi, Two Mississippi, Vandy and [censored]), and only one Big Ten school (Penn State).
And 1 out of 14 SEC schools pass on taking advantage of the FCS exemption (Florida), while half of the Big Ten do (Penn State, Nebraska, Wisconsin, OSU, TSUN, Minnesota and MSU).
LikeLike
Full marks to Arizona State for scheduling Texas A&M and Texas Tech the next two seasons. But their remaining non-conference foes are Cal Poly (FCS), New Mexico (a perennially awful mid-major), Northern Arizona (FCS), and UT San Antonio (didn’t even have a team till 5 years ago).
LikeLike
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/las-vegas-is-a-terrible-place-for-an-nhl-team/
Nat e Silver says the NHL shouldn’t expand to Las Vegas, but the NBA would make sense.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/25163988/in-wainwright-wake-scherzer-adivocates-for-the-dh-for-both-leagues
Max Scherzer says the NL needs to add the DH, pointing to his injury plus Adam Wainwright tearing his achilles.
Though he enjoys batting, he suggested it’s more important what the fans want to see.
“If you look at it from the macro side, who’d people rather see hit — Big Papi or me?” Scherzer said. “Who would people rather see, a real hitter hitting home runs or a pitcher swinging a wet newspaper? Both leagues need to be on the same set of rules.”
And, with Wainwright’s injury likely to greatly impact the Cardinals’ season and the NL playofff race, Scherzer is pretty sure which set of rules both leagues need.
…
Beyond the obvious injury concern for pitchers, Scherzer sees other reasons the DH is preferable. While Scherzer says he likes “swinging the bat, working at it and competing, and trying to be better at hitting than the other pitcher,” he sees too many plusses to removing pitchers from the batters box.
“It also helps position players, as it enable teams to have a rotation at DH,” Scherzer said.
Beyond that, it would aid scoring, he pointed out.
“We keep searching for offense,” Scherzer said. “This would be the easiest way to add offense.”
LikeLike
I definitely do not want to see the dh in the National League. Baseball is neat for the fact the seperation of the two leagues is still somewhat there (although they subtract from it by the year). Leave this one alone.
LikeLike
I’m not a MLB fan and adding the DH to the NL wouldn’t change that for me, but I think Scherzer has a solid point. Players are becoming more and more specialized in MLB (starters, long relievers, guys to get lefties out, setup men, closers, players to bat against lefties, defensive substitutes, etc). The strategy may be more interesting without the DH, but how many $20M pitchers need to get hurt batting/running before owners say enough is enough? It’s easier to replace a positional player/DH than a starting pitcher, too.
In addition, MLB gets the bonuses of more offense (which fans like) and having the same rules in both leagues (avoids confusing new fans). The MLBPA gets an extra way to keep an old guy that can’t play defense anymore on the roster of those NL teams. The only downsides are for the traditionalists, especially amongst NL fans. In a sport desperate to get more young fans, this is an obvious move.
LikeLike
“The only downsides are for the traditionalists, especially amongst NL fans. In a sport desperate to get more young fans, this is an obvious move.”
Its arguments like this which is the reason that traditionalists like me will always have something new to gripe about.
LikeLike
If there going to normalize the DH through both leagues, I think they should also liberalize the existing rules on double-switching to spots in the lineup to retain that element of strategy fromt he NL. Examples of current DH rules (Official Rule 6.10) are: the DH is locked into spot x in t elineup and can only be replaced by a player who becomes the DH. and also, if a DH is moved to a on-field position during the game, the team forfeits the DH and must place the pitcher in that spot.
6.10 (http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/batter_6.jsp)
Any League may elect to use the Designated Hitter Rule.
(a) In the event of inter-league competition between clubs of Leagues using the Designated Hitter Rule and clubs of Leagues not using the Designated Hitter Rule, the rule will be used as follows:
1. In World Series or exhibition games, the rule will be used or not used as is the practice of the home team.
2. In All-Star games, the rule will only be used if both teams and both Leagues so agree.
(b) The Rule provides as follows:
A hitter may be designated to bat for the starting pitcher and allsubsequent pitchers in any game without otherwise affecting the status of the pitcher(s) in the game. A Designated Hitter for the pitcher must be selected prior to the game and must be includedin the lineup cards presented to the Umpire in Chief.
The designated hitter named in the starting lineup must come to bat at least one time, unless the opposing club changes pitchers.
It is not mandatory that a club designate a hitter for the pitcher, but failure to do so prior to the game precludes the use of a Designated Hitter for that game.
Pinch hitters for a Designated Hitter may be used. Any substitute hitter for a Designated Hitter becomes the Designated Hitter. A replaced Designated Hitter shall not re-enter the game in any capacity.
The Designated Hitter may be used defensively, continuing to bat in the same position in the batting order, but the pitcher must then bat in the place of the substituted defensive player, unless more than one substitution is made, and the manager then must designate their spots in the batting order.
A runner may be substituted for the Designated Hitter and the runner assumes the role of Designated Hitter. A Designated Hitter may not pinch run.
A Designated Hitter is locked into the batting order. No multiple substitutions may be made that will alter the batting rotation of the Designated Hitter.
Once the game pitcher is switched from the mound to a defensive position this move shall terminate the Designated Hitter role for the remainder of the game.
Once a pinch hitter bats for any player in the batting order and then enters the game to pitch, this move shall terminate the Designated Hitter role for the remainder of the game.
Once the game pitcher bats for the Designated Hitter this move shall terminate the Designated Hitter role for the remainder of the game. (The game pitcher may only pinch-hit for the Designated Hitter.)
Once a Designated Hitter assumes a defensive position this move shall terminate the Designated Hitter role for the remainder of the game. A substitute for the Designated Hitter need not be announced until it is the Designated Hitters turn to bat.
LikeLike
If there going to normalize the DH through both leagues, I think they should also liberalize the existing rules on double-switching to spots in the lineup to retain that element of strategy fromt he NL. Examples of current DH rules (Official Rule 6.10) are: the DH is locked into spot x in t elineup and can only be replaced by a player who becomes the DH. and also, if a DH is moved to a on-field position during the game, the team forfeits the DH and must place the pitcher in that spot.
I haven’t seen much appetite to alter the DH rule: those who favor it, would probably say it has worked as intended.
The double switch is a comparatively common maneuver in the NL. It probably happens somewhere every day. Putting the DH on the field defensively is a fairly uncommon occurence. I doubt that they’re going to put in a new flavor of double-switch rule to account for that possibility.
LikeLike
The DH is a distraction.
The real issue is the conditioning of the players. Many years ago, about the time the four man rotation disappeared, an older pitching coach (AL?) opined that players were not as well conditioned as their were in earlier years. Pitchers in particular. They jogged around the ball field rather than sprinting. They didn’t pitch or throw nearly enough, and they were weak. The five man rotation produced layoffs that were too long. I wish I could remember the coaches name or where the interview appeared, but I’m too lazy to spend the morning looking for him and it.
I suppose night games also debilitated players. Your arm doesn’t go cold on an August afternoon.
I suspect the need to throw 100 mph fast balls and hard curves has something to do with it, too.
LikeLike
The real issue is the conditioning of the players. Many years ago, about the time the four man rotation disappeared, an older pitching coach (AL?) opined that players were not as well conditioned as their were in earlier years.
I would be willing to bet that players today are much better conditioned than they ever have. If they aren’t, why bother using steroids?
I suspect the need to throw 100 mph fast balls and hard curves has something to do with it, too
Much more likely here. Performance has got to the point where we’re reaching the limits of the human body.
The DH is a distraction.
The Cardinals are paying Adam Wainwright ~20 million this year to get outs, not hit. Every pitcher injured on the base paths increases the likelihood that the owners will add the DH in the NL for some concession from MLBPA.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“The real issue is the conditioning of the players. Many years ago, about the time the four man rotation disappeared, an older pitching coach (AL?) opined that players were not as well conditioned as their were in earlier years. Pitchers in particular. They jogged around the ball field rather than sprinting. They didn’t pitch or throw nearly enough, and they were weak. The five man rotation produced layoffs that were too long. I wish I could remember the coaches name or where the interview appeared, but I’m too lazy to spend the morning looking for him and it.”
They became more specialized, yes. They also became perhaps over-conditioned, to the point where they became brittle. The heavy use of weights and supplements has something to do with it, too. The old pitchers threw a lot more, but not as extreme in terms of speed and break on the ball. Maybe the change in the mound height had an impact, too. A big part of it may be the demand put on their arms as kids, too.
Now, I’ve heard some guys like Leo Mazzone advocate for pitchers throwing more often. But his run with the Braves included finesse pitchers like Maddox and Glavine. The power pitchers like Smoltz still got hurt.
LikeLike
I’m just quoting an old time coach. Have no idea. I suspect the use of multiple relievers and longer layovers between appearances is done so that starters can throw all-out like closers rather than pace themselves.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25165996/week-1-betting-lines-bama-osu-as-favorites-harbaugh-an-underdog
The early lines are out for week1.
Thursday, Sept. 3
Duke at Tulane (+20.5)
TCU at Minnesota (+19.5)
North Carolina vs. South Carolina (-7.5) — Charlotte, N.C.
Michigan at Utah (-3.5)
Friday, Sept. 4
Baylor at SMU (+35.5)
Kent State at Illinois (-17)
Saturday, Sept. 5
Arizona State at Texas A&M (-5.5) — Houston
Alabama vs. Wisconsin (+12.5) — Arlington, Texas
Virginia at UCLA (-16)
Texas at Notre Dame (-12.5)
Auburn vs. Louisville (+12.5) — Atlanta, Ga.
Sunday, Sept. 6
Purdue at Marshall (-13.5)
Monday, Sept. 7
Ohio State at Virginia Tech (+20.5)
LikeLike
http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/04/25/jeff-long-says-13th-games-were-factor-for-cfb-playoff-committee/
Jeff Long talks about how the committee valued CCGs.
Long, who chairs the selection committee for the College Football Playoff, was a guest in the broadcast booth for a short Q&A on the SEC Network during the Arkansas spring game Saturday afternoon. During his interview Long was asked about the College Football Playoff and the value of playing a conference championship game in the eyes of the selection committee. In his response, Long said the 13th game played by those in conference championship games was a factor for the selection committee. Baylor and TCU only played 12 games, with the Big 12 not holding a conference championship game.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25167509/sources-c-usa-wont-change-bylaws-to-keep-uab-without-football
CUSA won’t change their bylaws to allow UAB to stay without football.
Assuming UAB doesn’t reinstate football for 2016, the school will most likely be a C-USA member for one more academic year in 2015-16, given the short timeframe for the Blazers to find a new home. C-USA is reluctant to kick out UAB and leave its sports without playing schedules.
UAB would not receive a full revenue share next year in C-USA if it stays. UAB is expected to receive about $2.2 to $2.4 million this fiscal year from C-USA. The College Football Playoff is expected to be worth about $800,000 for UAB. C-USA’s postseason football revenue increased by about 500 percent this year due to the CFP compared to past revenue from the Bowl Championship Series.
When UAB eliminated football, bowling and rifle in December, the report the university used did not include a financial model accounting for no C-USA revenue. The Missouri Valley Conference has been discussed as a possible home.
LikeLike
I think C-USA is going to wait longer than 2016 before it expels UAB. Football may come back, and I think C-USA is going to want UAB in the league if they re-institute the sport. If UAB can promise the return of football by, say, 2018, I think C-USA winds up holding on to them.
It’s just a hunch, but I think the league will be reluctant to boot an original member as long as it’s possible football could return within a few years.
LikeLike
Wow, I have a knack for saying the same sentences two or three times in a row with only slight variations. Maybe I should work the Department of Redundancy Department. (Cue the drums: Ba-dum-ba-chih)
LikeLike
I think they’ll wait to see how all these reports turn out. If UAB commits to regaining football, then CUSA will probably let them stay. If UAB doesn’t immediately make that commitment, I think they get the axe. I don’t think the new members care that UAB is a founding member. They want that CCG money.
LikeLike
“They want that CCG money.”
What does UAB have to do with CCG money for CUSA? Isn’t CUSA at 13 in FB without UAB, same as the MAC has been for all of this decade between Temple and UMass? And the CCG will be deregulated before they could lose TWO more teams.
LikeLike
I miscounted with all the changes they have going on in membership.
CUSA would be at 13 without UAB since Charlotte joins in football next year. And I doubt they’d choose to stay at 13.
LikeLike
“… with all the changes they have going on in membership.”
Why I posed it as a question rather than as a statement … I’d thought that was the number, but I doubt I could name all 13.
The Sunbelt is probably bracing for CUSA leveling up, but its an open question whether there’s a compelling add for the CUSA West that enough CUSA schools want to have in the conference.
Ah, hell, let me look at Wikipedia … OK, the East is slated to be ODU, UNC-Charlotte, Middle Tennesse, Western Kentucky and Marshall, with the South Florida island of the F_U’s.
UAB is presently in the East, but they were slated to go to the West, to join USM, LA Tech, Rice, UNT, UTSA and UTEP. Looking at that map and its easy to reckon the Rajin Cajuns, but then some suggest that LA Tech, Rice and USM are none too keen on having “THE University of Louisiana (Lafayette)” in the conference.
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“Why I posed it as a question rather than as a statement … I’d thought that was the number, but I doubt I could name all 13.”
It’s ridiculous.
2012 – 12 FB members
2013 – 8 new members (2 non-FB), 4 leave = 14 FB members
2014 – 1 new member, 1 adds FB, 3 leave = 13 FB members
2015 – 1 adds FB, 1 drops FB = 13 FB members
“The Sunbelt is probably bracing for CUSA leveling up, but its an open question whether there’s a compelling add for the CUSA West that enough CUSA schools want to have in the conference.
Ah, hell, let me look at Wikipedia … OK, the East is slated to be ODU, UNC-Charlotte, Middle Tennesse, Western Kentucky and Marshall, with the South Florida island of the F_U’s.
UAB is presently in the East, but they were slated to go to the West, to join USM, LA Tech, Rice, UNT, UTSA and UTEP. Looking at that map and its easy to reckon the Rajin Cajuns, but then some suggest that LA Tech, Rice and USM are none too keen on having “THE University of Louisiana (Lafayette)” in the conference.”
ULL is an obvious choice. Other options are ULM, TX State, AK State, Troy and South AL.
Or maybe CUSA adds another eastern school and moves MTSU west. GA State would get them into Atlanta while GA State would at least add GA to the footprint.
LikeLike
All of that instability and all of those schools moved up from the Sunbelt would be part of the reason to not hurry up to replace UAB.
“ULL is an obvious choice. Other options are ULM, TX State, AK State, Troy and South AL.”
I think that many people discount ULM and Troy (and if LA Tech does not want another downstate Louisiana school, they definitely wouldn’t want one as close as ULM), I’d probably discount them myself.
None of ULL, TX State, AR State and USA would surprise me, but its also possible that there is some opposition to each of them. After all, CUSA’s already made a lot of invitations from the Sunbelt, and any reasons that any of the existing Sunbelt schools were not in that big wave of former Sunbelt schools might still be in force.
People thinking that the same factors that pushed UAB into the west rather than one of the new invites might be inclined to guess USA, but USA is much closer to USM than Birmingham is.
“Or maybe CUSA adds another eastern school and moves MTSU west. GA State would get them into Atlanta while GA State would at least add GA to the footprint.”
Or Western KY, but either would be over the objections of those schools.
LikeLike
On the main issue of the thread, Brian said: “I think they’ll wait to see how all these reports turn out. If UAB commits to regaining football, then CUSA will probably let them stay. If UAB doesn’t immediately make that commitment, I think they get the axe.”
I do think that UAB gets the axe if the decision is not reversed … allowing them to get these reports and work through a process where they might reverse the decision suggests they will be allowed to play out 2015/16, but if they cannot make a commitment to restart FB, it will be a farewell tour.
After all, independent of the CCG, CUSA as a conference enforcing that rule helps ensure that any later evaluations on other CUSA schools dropping FB include the loss of CUSA membership among the negatives of dropping FB. That threat loses its credibility if they abandon it when it comes to a test.
LikeLike
http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/04/29/jim-delany-takes-subtle-jab-at-sec-in-satellite-camp-discussion/
Jim Delany got asked about the satellite camp issue.
Not surprisingly, Delany is not bothered by the practice…
… although, if if some conferences — he’s looking at you, SEC; you too, ACC — want to discuss eliminating them, he wants it to be a part of a broader discussion of practices he considers objectionable…
Now, the first two practices, oversigning and grayshirting, are, right or wrong, generally associated with the SEC. That third one, flipping recruits? That’s a national phenomenon that knows no conference boundaries.
LikeLike
That third one, flipping recruits? That’s a national phenomenon that knows no conference boundaries.
It’s not only national; I am not sure why he thinks that’s a problem.
LikeLike
I’m not sure either, but my guess would be that he doesn’t like to see a kid pressured to change his mind rather than keep his word. I’d also guess he doesn’t like kids being pressured to decide so early, and if they decide later there’d be less pressure to “flip.”
LikeLike
How do you prevent 16, 17, and 18 year olds from changing their mind?
LikeLike
They could add an early signing period in football as they have in basketball. Maybe allow high school students to take official visits over the summer and sign LOI’s in mid-August? That would prevent some flipping.
Although any high level recruit really has no need to sign an LOI and lock himself into a particular school, when that school could see a coaching change or be punished for rules violations. The best players should sign scholarship agreements, which are less binding. As long as coaches can flip schools with ease, athletes should have the same freedom.
LikeLike
I have long said eliminate signing day. It gets bat shit crazy with last minute flips.
Let kids sign on the earliest of 17th birthday or 30 days after last game as a junior.
Both sides bound by the letter. Kid ends up being a dud as a senior? Too bad. Can’t get admitted? Too bad. New coach doesn’t want him? Tough.
I’d also liberalize transfers. Coach leaves get a free transfer except you have to sit if a member of current school’s staff is there. No hiring to raid teams.
LikeLike
Arkstfan,
“How do you prevent 16, 17, and 18 year olds from changing their mind?”
By not letting them commit so early so they can change their minds several times before making their decision public. The problem isn’t that the kids change their minds so much as the amount of pressure coaches put on them to change their minds. I’d prefer a system where once a kid verbally commits, no other school can contact him. If he decides to re-open his recruitment, then everyone can get back in touch. But he can basically turn off the noise by saying he’s committed.
LikeLike
You can’t prevent them from saying where they want to go. You can stop schools from offering early but it’s still going to be wink wink nod nod
LikeLike
I have long said eliminate signing day. It gets bat shit crazy with last minute flips.
Let kids sign on the earliest of 17th birthday or 30 days after last game as a junior.
I’m not fond of early signing. There’s a reason 17-year-olds cannot enter into binding legal commitments: the law views them as too immature to appreciate the potential consequences of their decision.
The LOI process gets around this by making the parents sign. But still, it’s the athlete who is making the decision and who has to live with it. Anything that forces the decision earlier, means more athletes making consequential life choices they may not yet fully understand.
LikeLike
“How do you prevent 16, 17, and 18 year olds from changing their mind?”
By not letting them commit so early so they can change their minds several times before making their decision public. The problem isn’t that the kids change their minds so much as the amount of pressure coaches put on them to change their minds. I’d prefer a system where once a kid verbally commits, no other school can contact him. If he decides to re-open his recruitment, then everyone can get back in touch. But he can basically turn off the noise by saying he’s committed.
That is also my favored solution. I think there is one obstacle: to my knowledge, the actual concept of a “commitment” is found nowhere in the current rules. Officially, it doesn’t exist. A kid says he is “committed,” and the recruiting press covers it feverishly, but schools don’t (and can’t) acknowledge it. There’s no record of its existence, other than what a kid says and what journalists and fansites report.
If they make it an NCAA violation to contact a committed athlete, then the concept of a “commitment” needs to officially exist. Both the commitment and the de-commitment need to be recorded somewhere, probably on an NCAA website where both the athlete and the school formally acknowledge it.
Of course, this would probably mean an end to the rule that coaches can’t talk about recruited athletes before they sign an LOI. If the schools have to formally log commitments, it would be strange to continue to insist that they can’t talk about them.
LikeLike
If we are recording the commitment and erecting a no fly zone we are basically creating soft NLI’s
LikeLike
The difference is that this rule would be designed to help the player by making unwanted distractions go away without being a binding decision.
LikeLike
Brian, I think your system is already in place, if that’s what the kid wants. If a kid commits to school A, and school B calls, he is free to tell school B to stop calling him or he will eliminate them forever and that if they are still interested, they should wait until he decommits.
But most kids do like the attention. They like to have fall back options, or to continue to explore equal/better options.
I don’t know if all schools do it, but I know the team I follow says they don’t recruit kids that are committed and don’t want to be recruited. They will only keep in contact if the kid says he is open to it. That seems reasonable and a good idea, to not piss off a kid that may decommit at some point in the future.
LikeLike
Logan,
“Brian, I think your system is already in place, if that’s what the kid wants. If a kid commits to school A, and school B calls, he is free to tell school B to stop calling him or he will eliminate them forever and that if they are still interested, they should wait until he decommits.
But most kids do like the attention. They like to have fall back options, or to continue to explore equal/better options.
I don’t know if all schools do it, but I know the team I follow says they don’t recruit kids that are committed and don’t want to be recruited. They will only keep in contact if the kid says he is open to it. That seems reasonable and a good idea, to not piss off a kid that may decommit at some point in the future.”
What I hear is that schools continue to call and text and mail things “just to check in on how they’re doing,” just not as often. The reporters keep nagging them, too. Having an official version of verbally committing would stop that.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/04/28/big-12-working-on-tiebreakers-to-crown-true-football-champ/26536075/
The B12 is working on tie breakers for football. They’ve agreed to use head-to-head to decide a tie between two teams. Next week they’ll discuss what to do with ties between three or more teams.
Commissioner Bob Bowlsby reiterated Tuesday at the College Football Playoff meetings that his conference is prepared to use head-to-head results to break a two-way tie for first. He added that athletic directors will discuss at league meetings next week in Phoenix different procedures for breaking ties between more than two teams. Bowlsby told reporters the goal with three or more teams will be to whittle the group down to two and then use head-to-head to crown a champion.
LikeLike
Bob Bowlsby said yesterday that he thinks the Big XII should re-instate their championship game as soon as the rules allow them to do so: link.
That would be in 2016, at the earliest.
LikeLike
Bowlsby said he made a point in Wednesday’s talks to seek clarification from Long about the significance of the extra game in committee deliberations. He cited it as a factor that conference commissioners “did not hear about … until the last day of the season” when Long cited it as a tiebreaking tool that separated Ohio State, Baylor and TCU.
Bowlsby said Long told him in Wednesday’s meeting that “13 data points are better than 12” when separating closely matched teams for playoff purposes. That, in Bowlsby’s mind, answered a burning question about how league officials should proceed in deciding future football championships.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12789694/big-12-likely-add-championship-game-commissioner-bob-bowlsby-says
ESPN also talked about it:
“There was talk about whether the Big 12 needs to decide a champion, and the group felt like that’s up to the Big 12; it’s not our decision,” Hancock said. “From the reports I’m hearing and reading, they are heading in that direction. I don’t know that it would’ve helped them last year, I really don’t. I don’t think anybody can say. Because the committee put Baylor ahead of TCU in large part because they won the game.”
I think the key is that the 13th game only helps if it’s against a good opponent. OSU and Baylor both played good teams that day and won handily while winning conference titles (the committee viewed Baylor as the B12 champ because of their H2H win). TCU blew out a cupcake and finished as a co-champ viewed as the runner up. Based on how Baylor and OSU played, the committee had no reason to move Baylor up. Since FSU, OSU and Baylor all won titles, they jumped TCU.
I only see 2 scenarios where a CCG helps the B12 last year:
1. Baylor blows out TCU so impressively that they pass OSU despite OSU’s 59-0 win over WI.
2. TCU beats Baylor so impressively that they stay ahead of OSU despite OSU’s 59-0 win over WI and TCU’s earlier loss to Baylor.
Neither seems very likely as I’d expect them to play fairly close games most of the time.
LikeLike
http://www.macon.com/2015/04/28/3718645_georgia-eyeing-more-high-profile.html?rh=1
UGA is looking for some tough OOC games, but is dodging one school.
Athletics director Greg McGarity said Georgia was eyeing “memorable” games next decade against teams that play in “iconic stadiums.” He estimated that such a series could be announced within four-to-five months.
“I ask staff, I ask friends, I ask donors, if you had two or three places where would you like to go? And they’ve aligned with what I think,” McGarity said Tuesday before a UGA Day in Albany. “So that’s what we’re trying to do, is do some experiences not only for our fans but our students.”
You can scratch one possibility off the list: Ohio State.
Georgia and Ohio State had a memorandum of understanding to play in 2020 and 2021. But that was canceled by Ohio State, and McGarity said it will not be revived.
“Once Urban came in that was off the table,” McGarity said of Urban Meyer, hired as Ohio State coach in 2012.
Another unlikely choice is MI due to their full schedule.
Some possibilities mentioned: PSU, USC, UCLA
LikeLike
Another unlikely choice is MI due to their full schedule.
Michigan’s schedule is not full for most of those years. They do have at least one OOC P5 opponent scheduled every season through 2027, but seem now to be willing to schedule two of these, at least some of the time, e.g. both Washington and Virginia Tech in 2020-21.
That is a major change from recent Michigan custom, where the OOC schedule was usually Notre Dame plus three tomato cans. (Of course, as Appalachian State proved, scheduling a tomato can is no assurance of beating them.)
When Michigan’s AD mentioned a few years ago that he they were trying to toughen-up the OOC schedule, Georgia was one of the most oft-requested schools on the Wolverine fan boards. At the time, that seemed like a pipe dream, as Georgia hasn’t played a road game in the midwest in decades.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“Michigan’s schedule is not full for most of those years. They do have at least one OOC P5 opponent scheduled every season through 2027, but seem now to be willing to schedule two of these, at least some of the time, e.g. both Washington and Virginia Tech in 2020-21.”
I was just paraphrasing the article.
Michigan is another unlikely opponent, McGarity said, pointing out the Wolverines were “tied up” with other schools, including Florida.
LikeLike
D-1 Baseball’s Kendall Rogers has put together his weekly bracketology for college baseball.
http://www.d1baseball.com/analysis/field-of-64-projections-week-12/
Top 8 National Seeds
#1 UCLA
#2 LSU
#3 Louisville
#4 Texas A&M
#5 TCU
#6 Vandy
#7 Florida State
#8 FTT’s Fighting Illini
Other No. 1 seeds: USC, Arizona State, Florida, Miami, OK State, UC Santa Barbara, FAU & Dallas Baptist.
The SEC gets nine bids, followed by the ACC with seven, with the Pac-12 and B1G with five each.
The B1G gets more bids than the Big XII and the Big West – WOW!
LikeLike
A decent first round for the B10.
Good news:
* 3 players in the top 15
* A top 10 pick, so that streak is over
Bad news:
* No QB again, so the streak grows to 21 years before next year it finally ends (Cook, Hackenberg, Jones maybe)
* Randy Gregory’s weed problem dropped him to round 2
The top of the 2nd round should see Gregory and Devin Smith go with several others possibilities to go during the round.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12788774/college-football-playoff-meetings-no-decision-made-navy-new-year-six-bowl-eligibility
The CFP committee couldn’t decide what to do about Navy and the NYD6 bowls.
Sources said some of the commissioners believe any teams that play after the final rankings are released should be ineligible from playing in one of College Football Playoff’s six bowl games.
LikeLike
http://www.vanquishthefoe.com/byu-cougars-football/2015/4/29/8517769/chuck-neinas-just-demolished-byu-to-big-12-expansion-narrative
Chuck Neinas explains why BYU has no shot at a P5 spot.
LikeLike
You’ve gotta respect Neinas. I think BYU’s best shot is a disruptive event where multiple moves happen like dominoes falling, as they did during the last round of re-alignment. A straight-up Big XII expansion, with no other P5 moves, does not seem to be especially compelling.
LikeLike
Actually what he said was that BYU was one of the most respected institutions in the country and was plenty good enough for a P5 slot. TCU, WVU and Louisville just fit better.
The only comment he makes that comes anywhere to approaching Brian’s comment was when he said there was no chance the Big 12 would expand if the ccg exemption passed.
LikeLike
The only comment he makes that comes anywhere to approaching Brian’s comment was when he said there was no chance the Big 12 would expand if the ccg exemption passed.
Passage of the CCG exemption is now widely viewed as a foregone conclusion. On that assumption, Neinas is saying, for all intents and purposes, that BYU has “no shot,” even though he doesn’t utter those exact words.
LikeLike
Exactly. And I was basically just paraphrasing the blog post I linked, and that’s from a BYU blog.
The P12 won’t take them and the B12 won’t need to expand so they won’t. It would take a seismic change like the P16 forming and the B12 being torn apart to give BYU a shot.
LikeLike
Indy won’t bid on the next round on NCGs.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2015/05/01/college-football-playoff-championship-indianapolis-lucas-oil-stadium-ohio-state-urban-meyer/26695427/
More detail on the story. They want to wait and see how the event develops over a few years before bidding.
“With a new event, you want to see it grow,” Vaughn said. “You want to see what it looks like year after year after year. What happens in Dallas isn’t necessarily the way we would do things. … We’d like to see it in a couple different settings to understand the event a little bit better. We do think it was a great event, by the way, and we’re certainly interested in being part of the discussion in future years.”
…
Officials of the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif., announced last week that they would not bid on the game. The Los Angeles Times noted that the stadium has fewer luxury suites than larger, newer stadiums in other cities.
…
The cities that will bid are Minneapolis; Atlanta; Jacksonville, Fla.; Miami; San Antonio; and Santa Clara, Calif. Next year’s game is in Glendale, Ariz., outside Phoenix and the 2017 game is in Tampa, Fla.
Atlanta and Minneapolis would appear to be strong contenders to land the game, with both cities opening new billion-dollar stadiums.
Vaughn said bidding for the game in 2018-20 might conflict with conventions and events for which Indy has contracts.
Apparently a bid costs about $18-20M.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12799685/projections-show-2015-college-football-season-divisions
ESPN calculates how much the divisions in conferences help or hurt the various P5 teams.
B10:
Biggest losers:
RU -0.7 W per season
UMD -0.4
IL, MSU -0.3
Biggest winners:
WI +0.8 W per season
IA +0.6
NE +0.3
Neutral:
OSU and MI
LikeLike
As a note, WI was the team that gained the most benefit from divisions out of all the P5 schools. And the B10 had the biggest range of gain/loss.
B10: -0.7 to +0.8
SEC: -0.6 to +0.6 (AL to MO)
ACC: -0.5 to +0.3 (Miami to UL)
P12: -0.3 to +0.2 (Cal to Stanford)
A big part of that is the current imbalance between the B10 divisions, and that will change over time. Going to 9 games should also reduce the difference.
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/118589/eliminating-divisions-how-would-the-big-ten-fare
Looking at past results show similar results for the B10.
Teams that gained the most: WI, IA, NE
Teams that lost the most: MSU, PSU, RU/UMD
LikeLike
ESPN is projecting the SEC West to be a dogfight.
LikeLike
Very much so. Theses sorts of predictions always compress the standings, though.
Expected SEC wins (without divisions / with divisions):
AL – 5.4 / 4.8
LSU – 5.3 / 5.1
MS – 5.0 / 4.7
TAMU – 4.9 / 4.7
AR – 4.8 / 4.3
AU – 4.2 / 3.7
MsSU – 3.4 / 3.1
LikeLike
It’s a pretty unsophisticated analysis, as it looks only at the 2015 schedule. The “winners” and “losers,” therefore, depend on whether they got a strong or weak draw in the crossover games this year: Wisconsin drew Maryland and Rutgers; Illinois drew Ohio State and Penn State. Those cross-overs aren’t permanent, so the (dis)advantage will be more spread out, over time.
LikeLike
Did you really expect better from ESPN?
On the other hand, when you get into future schedules you are also talking about unknown team strengths. They probably should have just labelled it as who benefits in 2015 from divisions.
I did a similar analysis years ago based on the historical strength of teams and the average schedule over infinite years, but that’s got obvious problems, too.
LikeLike
Not a great draft for the B10, except so far, the B10 has provided as many RB’s as the rest of the P5 conferences combined.
LikeLike
Agreed. Ben that way the past few years. Part of it is Michigan, PSU and Nebraska have not produced the past 5-7 years. OSU is a timing issue as they should have a ton of picks next year.
It’s amazing how many players are coming from Miami and Clemson etc.. but yet they aren’t exactly competing for NC’s.
It wasn’t all that long ago that the B1G and the SEC had approximately the same number of players drafted.
LikeLike
Yes, it’s been a slow so far. But much of that is expected with PSU under sanctions, MI going through a transition and OSU being really young. OSU will have a lot more players available next year and MI and PSU in the next few years.
On the bright side, we had a top 10 pick to end that streak. As you mentioned, the RB group has done well. The 1st round QB drought should end next year as well (Cook, Hackenberg, maybe Jones).
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/4/30/8526529/nfl-draft-2015-results-college-conference-recruiting-ratings
The numbers through 3 rounds (99 picks):
P12 – 25
SEC – 22
ACC – 20
B10 – 15
B12 – 7
B10 had 6 in round 4 (37 picks) and has 5 of the first 20 picks in round 5. That’s about the same rate in round 4 and an improvement in round 5 so far.
A note:
2015 OSU is the first National Champion since 2003 OSU to not have a 1st round pick. The 2002 team was also young as there were 7 eventual 1st rounders on it. The 2014 team could/should be similar.
http://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-football/2015/05/53176/beyond-the-obvious-what-ohio-state-having-no-1st-round-nfl-draft-picks-really-means
LikeLike
Update:
B10 got 10 picks in round 5 out of 40 total.
LikeLike
And followed that up with a terrible 6th round with only 3 of 41 picks.
LikeLike
And the 7th round was even worse with 1 of 39. At least it was a NW guy, right?
Final numbers (out of 256):
SEC – 54
ACC – 47
Pac-12 – 39
Big Ten – 35
Big 12 – 25
American – 11
The P5 made up 200 of the picks (78%). Of those 200, the B10 had 17.5% while having 21.9% of the schools. 44 picks would have been the B10’s “fair share.”
Top schools:
FSU – 11
UL – 10
UF – 8
AL – 7
Miami – 7
OSU – 5
MSU, MN – 4
IA, MI, NE, PSU – 3
UMD, NW, RU, WI – 2
IN, PU – 1
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york-giants/post/_/id/42455/total-breakdown-giants-draft-db-mykkele-thompson-in-fifth-round
Odd draft story. The NYG took a guy in the 5th round that expected to be an undrafted free agent. The NYG were the only team to bring him in for a visit, too. Bad use of a pick, probably, but a great example that it only takes one team to fall in love with you.
LikeLike
Texas had one of the best secondaries in the nation. They were #11 nationally in yardage despite being in the pass happy Big 12. They were the only Big 12 team in the top 50 in pass defense as the conference had 4 of the top 9 and 5 of the top 16 pass offenses. Diggs and Thompson both were undersized, but both got drafted. There’s also a lot of Texas secondary players in the NFL-9 on the list I saw.
So he got selected not so much for individual stats, but for what his defense did.
LikeLike
One of the interesting stories was Nate Boyer, a deep snapper for Texas, getting signed as a free agent by Seattle. He is a 34 year old former Green Beret who went to college after time in the army.
LikeLike
He may turn into a great 5th round pick, but by all accounts they could’ve waited another round or two and still gotten him. That’s the weird part, not that he got picked.
LikeLike
http://www.vox.com/2014/5/7/5683448/how-nfl-teams-ignore-basic-economics-and-draft-players-irrationally
NFL GM’s ignore basic economic theory and draft irrationally.
But here’s the thing: despite years of data, most NFL teams still have no idea how to work the draft most effectively.
It’s not their imperfect player evaluation, but something more basic — their refusal to follow the principle of risk diversification. That’s the conclusion economists Cade Massey and Richard Thaler came to after analyzing fifteen years of draft data in a series of papers — and it’s still true, despite recent changes to the wages rookies are paid.
Draft picks can be traded, and the success of any one player picked is highly uncertain. Because of that, their data says that in the current trade market, teams are always better off trading down — that is, trading one high pick for multiple lower ones — but many teams become overconfident in their evaluation of one particular player and do the exact opposite: package several low picks for the right to take one player very early.
…
He and Thaler figured this out by calculating the odds that the first player picked at any given position will perform better — in terms of the number of games he starts in his first five seasons — than the second player drafted at that position. This is relevant because a team will often trade up when they identify a player they prefer at a needed position: they need a wide receiver, and a few highly-rated ones are available, but they trade up because they’re certain one is much better.
But the data says that teams just aren’t very good at figuring out when this is true. On average, the chance that first player will start more games than the second one picked at his position: 52 percent. Compared to the third, it’s still only 55 percent, and compared to the fourth, it’s merely 56 percent.
There’s a great graph of the relative value of the first 5 rounds of draft picks to #1 based on over 1000 actual trades during a 19 year span (1990-2008). It’s incredibly steep and the performance data of players doesn’t come close to supporting it.
Their basic conclusions:
1. It’s just not worth it to trade up
2. It really pays off to trade down
3. Later players are cheaper (and better values)
4. Teams that trade down win more games (see: the Patriots)
So why don’t more teams trade down?
One answer is a widely-known psychological bias called the overconfidence effect. As people are given more information, the accuracy of their analysis often hits a ceiling, but their confidence in it continues to increase.
… Thaler and Massey have found that, given a long enough timeframe, no teams are any better at accurately evaluating prospects than others. Sure, a GM might hit a hot streak over the course of a few drafts, but long-term, they estimate that 95 to 100 percent of the difference in teams’ odds of striking gold with any one pick is driven by chance.
So the key isn’t drafting better — it’s just drafting more.
LikeLike
http://www.footballperspective.com/which-college-conferences-dominate-the-nfl-draft/
Which conferences provided the most draft value per team from 2004-2013 (using the 2013 members):
SEC – 230
ACC – 186
B10 – 174
P12 – 166
B12 – 152
American – 72
LikeLike
http://www.footballperspective.com/colleges-the-nfl-draft-and-heat-maps-since-1990/
Which teams have dominated the draft since 1990?
1. FSU – 1165
2. Miami – 1141
3. USC – 1139
4. OSU – 1038
5. TN – 940
http://www.collegepollarchive.com/football/ap/total_points.cfm?from=1989&to=2013#.VUUt2JMeGYM
By comparison, how have they done in the AP poll (1989-2013)?
1. FSU – 418,335 (3 titles)
3. OSU – 374,717 (1 title)
5. Miami – 333,155 (3 titles)
9. TN – 290,844 (1 title)
11. USC – 265,681 (2 titles)
AP/NFL (team success/talent):
OSU – 361
FSU – 359
TN – 309
Miami – 292
USC – 233
I think this is partly a measure of how consistently that team was loaded with talent. USC’s talent came in a bunch so they didn’t score many AP points in other years, for example.
OSU and FSU were equally efficient at getting AP points for their talent level, FSU just had more talent.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/167605/inside-slant-the-collapse-of-the-nfl-qb-position-and-other-day-2-draft-takeaways
The collapse of the NFL QB position.
It has been 10 years since a quarterback drafted after the third round has started as many as 20 NFL games, which is bad news for Baylor’s Bryce Petty and UCLA’s Brett Hundley, among others.
Not to be too dramatic, but it feels as if we are seeing the deterioration of the quarterback pipeline before our very eyes. In the past 15 years, there has only been one other occasion when fewer than four quarterbacks were drafted in the first three rounds. That came two years ago, in 2013, when every signal-caller except EJ Manuel, Geno Smith and Mike Glennon remained on the board when the fourth round began.
It’s no secret that the spread offense has left NFL teams leery of college quarterbacks and clinging to their aging pocket passers. The average age of the top 10 quarterbacks last season, as measured by Total QBR, was 33. The 2013 and 2015 classes will do little to alleviate that imbalance, and the 2014 class — which includes Blake Bortles, Johnny Manziel, Teddy Bridgewater and Derek Carr — can’t yet be counted on for salvation.
Once again, I’ll pass along the working theory of Steve Clarkson, one of the country’s top youth quarterback coaches. The NFL, Clarkson believes, is at a crossroads at the position. It must either find a better way to transition spread quarterbacks into pro schemes, or it will have to make a major philosophical change to account for the injuries caused when pro teams run the spread. At the NFL level, teams would probably have to rotate quarterbacks to run the spread full time.
Maybe they need a developmental league? Somewhere that will pay QBs and force a pro-style system on them. CFB coaches are paid to win, not train NFL QBs.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/98744/time-for-big-12-to-bring-back-championship-game-but-with-a-twist
A writer proposes that the B12 revives their CCG in 2016 but play it on campus to give the top seed home field advantage and reduce the chances of an upset.
I think that’s a product of their history with a CCG. They had important upsets in 1996 (unranked over #3), 1998 (#8 over #3), 2001 (#9 over #3), 2003 (#15 over #1) and 2007 (#9 over #1). That’s 5 in 15 years. The other 10 years a top 10 team beat a lower ranked foe.
There’s zero push in the SEC to move to campus, but their favorites having a great winning percentage. The P12 just moved from campus to a neutral site. The ACC and B10 show no interest in playing on campus either.
For conferences with divisions, I think that’s the right choice. No division deserves an advantage over the other. But for a divisionless conference, playing on campus might make sense. It rewards the top seed with home field versus a foe they already played and either beat or they beat at least two other teams that foe lost to. And early December weather isn’t an issue for much of the B12.
I think everyone would love to see UT play at OU, for example.
Do the conferences with divisions hurt themselves by playing at a neutral site instead of giving the top team an edge? Is that HFA edge worth the sense of favoritism and the hassles (can’t sell tickets in advance, etc)?
—
But the blog goes off the rails a bit, too (IMO).
But what is clear is that the Big 12 is not getting the proper credit it deserves from the committee for playing a nine-game conference schedule.
Really? Or is it that the committee also looked at the OOC games and viewed the schedules in their entirety? Nobody seemed to dispute AL and OR being ahead of TCU and Baylor, so let’s ignore them.
http://masseyratings.com/cf/arch/compare2014-15.htm
All ranks are from Massey’s composite of 126 computer rankings on 12/6/2014:
OSU beat: @9, 16, @32, 40, 52, 56, @61, 65, @66, 70, 87, 120
OSU loss: 53
Baylor beat: 3, 12, @21, @42, 55, 78, 93, @97, @108, 124, I-AA
Baylor loss: @30
To me, that’s an edge to OSU. The top 5 wins are roughly equal, but OSU played 11 top 70 teams and Baylor only 6 (OSU had 4 on the road vs 2 for Baylor). Baylor clearly had the better loss but OSU was playing better at the end of the year IMO (59-0 over WI vs an 11 pt W over KSU).
TCU beat: 12, 21, @30, 32, @42, 55, 78, @93, 97, @124, I-AA
TCU loss: @6
Again, I see the edge for OSU. The top 6 wins are similar, but OSU played 11 top 70 teams to 6 for TCU. TCU obviously had the better loss.
I admire the B12 playing a 9 game schedule, but OSU played 9 B10 teams too. OSU also played 3 solid OOC games versus 1 for TCU and 0 for Baylor.
With a championship game, the Big 12 wouldn’t be operating on the same level as the other conferences. Because the Big 12 would be staging one more conference game than everyone else, except for the Pac-12.
Except that the B10 will be playing 9 games in 2016, too. That makes half of the other P5 conferences. And the ACC and SEC will be playing 9 P5 games. Unless the B12 adds a mandatory P5 OOC game, they’ll be equal to many teams and behind many others that play 10.
LikeLike
A lot of people were surprised by just how much influence the CCGs had on the final standings. The committee’s decisions are certainly understandable in hindsight. But going in, very few people saw it coming, even fairly knowledgeable people who had read the rules. Including, it seems, most of the Big XII.
This is why the existing CCG rule had to fall. You can’t have a system that puts the Big XII at a permanent disadvantage, with no way to fix it, other than a forced expansion that makes no sense financially. If they had made this explicit when the playoff was first under discussion, the Big XII might’ve voted no. (And to be clear, there almost certainly would have been no playoff if any power conference actively opposed it.)
Beyond that, the university presidents know that conference switches are like Lays potato chips: you can’t have just one. If you tell the Big XII that they have to expand to stay competitive, then you trigger other moves, which might further de-stabilize the very conferences whose members get to vote on the rules.
Understandably, even those who might have had some lingering preference for the CCG rule as originally written, might have concluded that de-regulating it was the lesser of two evils.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“A lot of people were surprised by just how much influence the CCGs had on the final standings.”
1. In large part that’s because many of those people were factoring conference champion status into their own thinking. They were treating FSU and OSU as champs already. The committee couldn’t and didn’t do that. Thus, the disconnect.
2. It wasn’t the CCGs that had so much influence. It was winning a P5 conference that had influence. FSU, OSU and Baylor all won their conference that weekend and they stayed in the same order they were in the previous week. They all passed TCU because TCU wasn’t considered a conference champion by them. The committee had been saying for weeks how close all 4 teams were, and the rules explicitly say conference champion status and head to head wins are two of the tiebreakers among equivalent teams.
“But going in, very few people saw it coming, even fairly knowledgeable people who had read the rules. Including, it seems, most of the Big XII.”
Actually, many people were talking about OSU getting in that week (nobody doubted FSU would make it). Many B12 fans and even coaches were saying and thinking it. You can see it in blogs and even in some quotes from coaches.
“This is why the existing CCG rule had to fall.”
1. No, it doesn’t have to fall. It will, but it doesn’t have to.
2. Wrong tense. The rule still exists.
“You can’t have a system that puts the Big XII at a permanent disadvantage, with no way to fix it, other than a forced expansion that makes no sense financially.”
Of course you can. They had no problem using bowls for the playoffs despite the permanent disadvantage that gives the B10 compared to everyone else, with no way to fix it beyond a forced expansion that makes no sense.
“If they had made this explicit when the playoff was first under discussion, the Big XII might’ve voted no.”
Made what explicit? That playing more good games would be helpful? That needs explaining?
“(And to be clear, there almost certainly would have been no playoff if any power conference actively opposed it.)”
Says you. The B10 was basically forced into it. Delany changed his tune once he admitted to himself that he couldn’t win the battle.
“If you tell the Big XII that they have to expand to stay competitive, then you trigger other moves, which might further de-stabilize the very conferences whose members get to vote on the rules.”
But nobody’s saying that. They’re saying the B12 needs a CCG if they’re going to insist on playing 3 cupcakes OOC. If Baylor had beaten a top 40 team OOC and scheduled at least 1 more decent OOC game, they might well have been ahead of OSU. If they’d had a better defense, they would’ve been picked anyway.
“Understandably, even those who might have had some lingering preference for the CCG rule as originally written, might have concluded that de-regulating it was the lesser of two evils.”
Then they concluded incorrectly.
LikeLike
“But going in, very few people saw it coming, even fairly knowledgeable people who had read the rules. Including, it seems, most of the Big XII.”
Actually, many people were talking about OSU getting in that week (nobody doubted FSU would make it). Many B12 fans and even coaches were saying and thinking it. You can see it in blogs and even in some quotes from coaches.
Unless they are being totally disingenuous (which is always possible in college sports), it does seem from their recent comments that most of the Big XII, including crucially the commissioner, was taken by surprise.
A lot of your arguments boil down to the idea that they should’ve seen it coming, and perhaps they should. But they’re not idiots. Unless they’re lying (i.e., knew it all along, but don’t want to admit it), I have to conclude that the rules were ambiguous enough that no one really had any clue what was going to happen.
“You can’t have a system that puts the Big XII at a permanent disadvantage, with no way to fix it, other than a forced expansion that makes no sense financially.”
Of course you can. They had no problem using bowls for the playoffs despite the permanent disadvantage that gives the B10 compared to everyone else, with no way to fix it beyond a forced expansion that makes no sense.
I assume you’re referring to the fact that none of the major bowls are played inside the B10 footprint, so the B10 can never be the de facto home team for a playoff game. But the B10 accepted (and indeed welcomed) that system decades ago. In the counter-factual where there is no playoff, the B10 would still be sending its teams to those very same games.
(Actually, the playoff does create the possibility of a national championship game in B10 territory, e.g., in Indy or Detroit, although neither city has bid on the game yet. Under the previous system, that could never have happened.)
“If they had made this explicit when the playoff was first under discussion, the Big XII might’ve voted no.”
Made what explicit? That playing more good games would be helpful? That needs explaining?
Given the Big XII’s surprise, I have to conclude it was not as obvious as you believe it was.
It’s worth noting that in the December 6 Massey composite (the last set of polls before the final Committee vote), TCU was ranked ahead of Ohio State. You could take the Massey composite as reflecting the settled “old way of thinking”, before the Committee cast its final vote. As I said above, the Committee’s decision is explainable in hindsight. But for people reared on the traditional polls as they’ve historically operated, it was not expected.
“If you tell the Big XII that they have to expand to stay competitive, then you trigger other moves, which might further de-stabilize the very conferences whose members get to vote on the rules.”
But nobody’s saying that.
Well, the Big XII commissioner is saying that. Chuck Neinas is saying that.
LikeLike
“Unless they are being totally disingenuous (which is always possible in college sports), it does seem from their recent comments that most of the Big XII, including crucially the commissioner, was taken by surprise.”
http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/04/10/tcu-gary-patterson-sounds-off-on-college-football-playoff/
Judging by Patterson’s story of a pregame meeting before the regular season finale with Iowa State head coach Paul Rhoads, he knew TCU was going to be left out of the mix unless some crazy things happened elsewhere.
“We were on the field before the ballgame and [Paul Rhoads] said he hopes if we ended up winning for us to have good luck. I told him, ‘Paul, we weren’t going to the playoffs.’ We were the first team playing on that Saturday and haven’t seen anybody else and I told him we weren’t going to the playoffs. I’m pretty good at gut feelings and I watched all the articles going through the week. I actually thought it was the kiss of death when we got moved to third.”
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/24956495/gary-patterson-art-briles-big-12-offer-case-study-of-cfp-snub
After the first year of the 12-member committee, Patterson came away with a few observations. One is that the committee “painted themselves in a corner” by ranking TCU No. 3 and ahead of Florida State entering the final week of the season, Patterson said. In the last week, TCU crushed a bad Iowa State team; Baylor beat ranked Kansas State to improve its schedule strength and allow a head-to-head win over TCU to carry weight; Florida State edged ranked Georgia Tech to stay undefeated; and Ohio State destroyed ranked Wisconsin with the Buckeyes’ No. 3 quarterback. TCU then fell to 6.
“It would have been better for us to be 4, not 3 [in the second-to-last week],” Patterson said. “Then you understand 5 and 6 because Baylor beat us head to head, and if you’re not going to be in the top 4, who cares?”
…
Another lesson Patterson learned is who you play out of conference matters. TCU plays Minnesota again in 2015 and has future games scheduled against Ohio State, Arkansas and California.
Meanwhile, Baylor has shown no interest in improving a non-conference schedule that was one of the worst in the country last season, and cited by the committee.
We are in the homestretch of the playoff chase, and the question nags: Can Ohio State make the four-team playoff?
“I would say it’s less than 50-50,” said Jerry Palm of CBSSports.com, the foremost analyst of College Football Playoff and NCAA tourney metrics.
“I think the Big 12 champ will end up ahead of Ohio State. But it’s not that clear. Reasonable people could disagree and make a case for Ohio State.”
…
What does Ohio State have to do to get into the Top Four? Especially now that star quarterback J.T. Barrett has been lost for the season with a broken right ankle?
“First, Ohio State has to beat Wisconsin,” says Palm. “It starts with that. If they do that, it will prove they can beat a very good football team with this guy at quarterback.”
“This guy” is sophomore Cardale Jones, who never has started a game in Columbus.
If everyone above Ohio State wins this weekend, it’s moot, right? OSU has no shot?
“Not necessarily,” said Palm. “If Baylor and TCU both win this week, Baylor has to be ahead of TCU. They have to be. There is no other way around it, or the committee can take its criteria and wad it up into a ball and throw it out.
“As for now, Ohio State is sandwiched between the two of them. If Baylor ends up ahead of TCU, does that mean it jumps both (TCU and Ohio State)? Or does TCU fall back? My guess is that Baylor jumps ahead of both of them.”
But know this, Buckeyes fans: The better Ohio State looks beating 10-2 Wisconsin, the better it is for them. Yes, Injuries are taken into account by the committee when it comes to selecting playoff teams. But the good thing is Ohio State gets to play a game with Jones at quarterback. If it can show the playoff committee it’s still a smooth running juggernaut with a win vs. Wisconsin, all the better.
Palm was saying that not knowing OSU would win 59-0 while Baylor would win by 11.
It sure sounds like some people knew. If others didn’t figure it out, that’s due to poor communication from the committee and a lack of thought from the people in question among other reasons. I’m not calling anyone an idiot, I’m saying they made unwarranted assumptions based on the old system rather than understanding how the process is supposed to work now.
“I assume you’re referring to the fact that none of the major bowls are played inside the B10 footprint, so the B10 can never be the de facto home team for a playoff game. But the B10 accepted (and indeed welcomed) that system decades ago. In the counter-factual where there is no playoff, the B10 would still be sending its teams to those very same games.”
That’s all true and changes absolutely nothing. The system puts the B10 at a permanent disadvantage with no way to fix it but a forced expansion that makes no financial sense. You claimed we can’t have that. I gave clear proof that we can.
Given the Big XII’s surprise, I have to conclude it was not as obvious as you believe it was.
They have blinders on, as evidenced by Briles claiming their OOC schedule wasn’t a factor even after the committee specifically cited it as a reason for OSU being ahead of them. How did they think the committee would determine the best teams if not by focusing on the games against top teams?
I think the B12 are being intentionally disingenuous.
1. They keep talking about the CCG being the difference, but OSU led Baylor before that. The CCG had nothing to do with it.
2. TCU moved from 3 to 6 because 3 teams won P5 conference titles that week. That was a black and white tiebreaker for similar teams, which the committee had spent weeks telling everybody those teams were. As mentioned above, many people knew TCU would drop if Baylor beat KSU. The CCG itself had nothing to do with it, it was clinching the title that moved OSU up.
3. They are playing up the 13 vs 12 angle, but playing 13 cupcakes wouldn’t help anyone. It was the number of good teams played, and the ridiculous OOC schedule of Baylor bit them in the butt when combined with playing the bottom of the B12. 13 games gives you more opportunities to play good teams, but ND plays of the the toughest schedules every year with 12 games. I don’t hear ND whining about the CCGs being an unfair advantage.
In this specific case, both Baylor and OSU played a top team in the last week. OSU won more impressively. TCU crushed a cupcake.
“It’s worth noting that in the December 6 Massey composite (the last set of polls before the final Committee vote), TCU was ranked ahead of Ohio State.”
Yes, the computers had them ahead 4.49 to 4.88 on average. But they also clearly think OSU was better than Baylor at this point. These computers weren’t told to reward conference champions, either. Of course, this system is limited by averaging ordinal rankings rather than using a finer scale.
The AP poll is a great example.
http://www.collegepollarchive.com/football/ap/seasons.cfm?appollid=1086#.VUbg2ZMeGYM
Which list is more informative?
12/7
4. Baylor
5. OSU
6. TCU
12/7
Baylor – 1265
OSU – 1262
TCU – 1257
Mathematically, the point totals provide a much better picture of the actual situation. Massey’s composite average is faulty for this reason.
“You could take the Massey composite as reflecting the settled “old way of thinking”, before the Committee cast its final vote.”
No, I’d take it as a composite of computer rankings that don’t factor intangibles like conference championships in to their thinking.
“But for people reared on the traditional polls as they’ve historically operated, it was not expected.”
It was for some/many people. The fact that people didn’t understand the new system doesn’t change whether the decision the committee made was correct according to the system as written.
“Well, the Big XII commissioner is saying that. Chuck Neinas is saying that.”
No, they’re not. I haven’t heard them say one word about having to expand to stay competitive. They’re saying they think the B12 needs a 13th game. I’d argue that’s primarily because some/many of the members won’t schedule decent OOC games. If UT or OU or KSU were 11-1, 8-1 last year they probably would’ve been ahead of OSU. Baylor played three joke games and paid the price for it.
LikeLike
I think you can make the case that the presence of a 13th game made Ohio St’s slate more difficult than TCU or Baylor’s. That said, comparing schedules by counting just the # of top 70 teams seems AWFULLY arbitrary, almost as if Ohio St played a bunch of teams that just barely qualified (four teams in 61-70 range) while Baylor and TCU played few such teams (zero in each case, as it turns out).
LikeLike
Matthew Smith,
“I think you can make the case that the presence of a 13th game made Ohio St’s slate more difficult than TCU or Baylor’s.”
Only because that 13th game was a good one, not a I-AA cupcake. There’s nothing magic about 13 vs 12, it’s who you play in those games.
“That said, comparing schedules by counting just the # of top 70 teams seems AWFULLY arbitrary,”
It is arbitrary, but I chose it as a replacement for looking up bowl teams as an additional layer of work. There are more than 70 bowl teams but they don’t take the teams in rank order, obviously. There were 81 bowl eligible teams for 76 bowl spots. I did post all the rankings so people can draw their own arbitrary lines if they want.
Go top 80 and it adds 1 each to Baylor and TCU (#78), making it 11 to 7 instead of 11 to 6.
Either way it makes my point that the main difference was the depth of the schedules (how many mediocre vs bad teams) and that was largely due to OOC scheduling.
LikeLike
Basically, no one totally knew what the committee’s criteria was, least of all the committee, and they contradicted themselves several times during the season.
LikeLike
When you get down into the 60s, it doesn’t make a whole lot of difference. And how you did against all these teams matters too. TCU was more impressive while Ohio St. struggled against more teams (obviously until Wisconsin). There’s a reason TCU was ahead of Ohio St. in the Massey composite. TCU also was winning in their loss against the #6 team until blowing it at the end. Ohio St. got whipped by Virginia Tech.
I think it clearly looks better for TCU.
Of course, Alabama and Oregon clearly looked better than Ohio St. on paper as well.
LikeLike
bullet,
“When you get down into the 60s, it doesn’t make a whole lot of difference.”
Apparently it does.
“And how you did against all these teams matters too.”
Yes.
“TCU was more impressive while Ohio St. struggled against more teams (obviously until Wisconsin).”
MOV before the bowls:
OSU = 24.1
TCU = 26.5
TCU played 3 1-possession games (won by 9 total pts)
OSU played 2 1-possession games (won by 14 total pts)
The computers didn’t see much difference and neither do I. Maybe it’s because TCU played weaker opponents?
“There’s a reason TCU was ahead of Ohio St. in the Massey composite.”
Several of them, probably. But they were barely ahead. As in, the computers felt they were comparable teams.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-protocol
When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:
* Championships won
* Strength of schedule
* Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
* Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
1. OSU won the B10, TCU didn’t win the B12 in the eyes of the committee.
2. The schedules were similar at the top but OSU’s was stronger in the middle to bottom.
3. They didn’t play each other.
4. Both beat MN, but OSU did it on the road in November while TCU was at home in September.
“TCU also was winning in their loss against the #6 team until blowing it at the end. Ohio St. got whipped by Virginia Tech.”
The game was tied early in the 4th quarter. It was a 1-possession game until OSU threw a pick 6 from midfield on the last meaningful possession with under 1 minute left. The game was ugly for both teams, but the scoreboard and box score don’t show a whipping.
“I think it clearly looks better for TCU.”
Of course you do. But you refuse to follow the procedure the committee was told to follow. TCU was never in the final discussion for them, it was OSU versus Baylor.
LikeLike
A couple of sad stories from the draft:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/nfl-draft-scout/25172277/nfl-draft-24-underclassmen-left-undrafted
24 of 84 underclassmen went undrafted (29%). Last year it was 37%.
After a record 98 underclassmen declared for the 2014 NFL Draft, the NFL tweaked the rules in an attempt to lower the number of early entrees and better educate players to make informed decisions. A minimum of five underclassmen from each school are allowed to petition the advisory committee for feedback and the grades players receive are either “first round,” “second round” or a “return to school” grade.
The total number of underclassmen fell for the 2015 NFL Draft, as did the number of underclassmen left undrafted. A step in the right direction, but the above list of players not drafted is another cautionary tale for future players eager to give up school to chase the NFL.
Stay in school kids.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/draft/2015/05/02/lael-collins-undrafted-lsu-tigers-free-agent/26804035/
La’el Collins did stay in school despite being a 2nd round projection and was projected as an early 1st round pick this year until his pregnant ex-girlfriend was murdered on Tuesday. The police said they want to interview him although they say he isn’t a suspect. On Thursday he asked the NFL to remove him from the draft and put him in the supplemental draft but the NFL said no.
He went undrafted in the 1st round. That night, he announced that if he wasn’t drafted in rounds 2 or 3 he would refuse to sign and re-enter the draft in 2016. As it turns out, he never got drafted. Because of that, he can’t re-enter the draft in 2016. He’d have to have been drafted but not signed to re-enter the draft according to the CBA. He’ll have to sign as an UFA.
If he is innocent, the timing is terrible for him and cost him millions. If he’s guilty, it’s obviously a very sad story for other reasons.
LikeLike
Brian – here’s a follow-up on La’el Collins.
http://theadvocate.com/news/12279868-125/ex-lsu-star-lael-collins-meets
LikeLike
Some ridiculously early 2016 mock drafts are out, and things look better for the B10.
Here are 2 full ones:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2450279-nfl-draft-2016-top-prospects-and-1st-round-mock-predictions
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/5/2/8534321/2016-nfl-mock-draft-prospects-cardale-jones-joey-bosa-christian-hackenberg-connor-cook-
And a top 15:
http://247sports.com/Article/Way-too-early-2016-NFL-Mock-Draft-37061374
Stats:
Top 16
B10 – 5*, 6*, 5
OSU – 3*, 4*, 3
1st Round
B10 – 7*, 8*
OSU – 4*, 4*
MSU – 2, 3
PSU – 1, 1
* – 1st overall pick (Joey Bosa)
1st round QBs (all in top 10)
B10 – 3, 3, 3
LikeLike
http://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-football/2015/05/53238/expect-an-even-bigger-buckeye-nfl-draft-class-in-2016
Some historical perspective on drafts picks in the next 2 drafts after winning a national title. It presents the stats for the 2004-2013 seasons.
Those 10 champs produced 35 first rounders in their next 2 drafts, for an average of 3.5 per team (max = 7, min = 2).
Those 10 champs produced 64 picks in year 1 and 69 in year 2, for averages of 6.4 and 6.9 respectively.
Of interest to me:
OSU in 2003 had no 1st rounder and 5 drafted overall.
In 2004 it had 3 1st rounders and 14 drafted overall.
OSU in 2015 had no 1st rounder and 5 drafted overall.
In 2016, who knows? Projections are for 3-4 1st rounders and a lot overall. We’ll see.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25172117/in-conference-championship-gamemwc-considering-altering-structure-allowing-two-best-teams-to-meet
The MWC is considering moving to having the best 2 teams play in their CCG if deregulation passes. They would keep divisions, though.
The Mountain West has staged a championship game the last two seasons. The higher-ranked team has won each time — Fresno State in 2013 and Boise in 2014.
Thompson explained the risk of continuing to play a game between division winners: A 6-6 Fresno State from the Mountain West’s West Division upsetting an undefeated Boise State from the Mountain West Mountain Division. Last year, Fresno State — 6-6 at the time — lost to Boise (10-2) 28-14 in Boise. The game was a rematch from the regular season.
“We’re having the game at the risk of a $6 million New Year’s Bowl,” Thompson said.
He was speaking of the CFP payout for playing in that Golden Ticket game.
Using that “best team” concept, Boise State would have had to play either Colorado State or Utah State — two double-digit winners — in another rematch from the regular season.
The advantage for the MWC: Conceivably, any of three could have grabbed the Golden Ticket berth. Boise State finished 12-2 followed by Colorado State (10-3) and Utah State (10-4).
“There’s not an easy solution,” Thompson added.
LikeLike
The favored MWC team losing to anyone probably ends the hope of a 6M payday. You could argue that divisional winners in CCG might make the path easier on occasion, for the favorite. They still need to win the game, and they already placed ahead of an in division “second best”.
LikeLike
Maybe. But they may enough better than other conferences for the divisional runner-up to still become the best G5 champ. It’s rare that the MAC, SB (or even CUSA champ any more) will challenge them. The American champ is the main threat to the MWC champ.
It completely defeats the concept of divisions to let #2 play #1 again for the conference title, though.
LikeLike
It completely defeats the concept of divisions to let #2 play #1 again for the conference title, though.
If you do that, the divisions are just a system for locking games that are played annually. “Winning” it has no meaning.
LikeLike
Yes … if divisions without a meaningful division championship are JUST a scheduling thing, there would be no point in having a division standings … or names for the divisions … as the standings that matter would be the overall conference ladder.
Whether or not a geographically sprawling conference has agreed to split geographically for the average savings in travel costs, versus other available approaches to locking games, would not be something demanding the attention of the typical supporter.
LikeLike
ESPN’s Mark Schlabach’s Post Spring way-too-early top 25.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12814346/ohio-state-buckeyes-lock-no-1-spot-too-early-top-25
LikeLike
I think 7 of the top 10 teams have QB questions.
1. OSU – which returning starter is it?
2. TCU – none
3. OR – new starter
4. AU – new starter
5. USC – none
6. Baylor – new starter
7. AL – new starter
8. MSU – none
9. UGA – new starter
10. Clemson – returning from knee injury
17. WI
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12816910/bowl-projections-2015-college-football-season
I see that and I’ll raise you their way too early bowl projections.
The two people agree on OSU, TCU and AU for the CFP (Orange and Cotton). One picks OR, the other USC.
Orange:
OSU vs AU – OSU wins
OSU vs AU – AU wins
Cotton:
TCU vs OR – TCU wins
TCU vs USC – TCU wins
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/118683/big-ten-bowl-projections-way-too-early-edition
Just for the B10:
College Football Playoff semifinal (Capital One Orange Bowl or Goodyear Cotton Bowl Classic): Ohio State
Rose Bowl Game presented by Northwestern Mutual: Michigan State
Buffalo Wild Wings Citrus: Wisconsin
Outback: Nebraska
National University Holiday: Minnesota
Franklin American Mortgage City Music/TaxSlayer: Penn State
Foster Farms: Michigan
New Era Pinstripe: Iowa
Quick Lane: Maryland
Lockheed Martin Armed Forces/Zaxby’s Heart of Dallas: Rutgers
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/118649/big-tens-way-too-early-power-rankings
And their way too early B10 power rankings:
OSU
MSU
WI
NE
MN
PSU
MI
RU
IA
UMD
IL
NW
IN
PU
I’m surprised where they have IA.
LikeLike
So you’re telling me I have a chance…
LikeLike
I think Hazell is improving you guys. It was such a mess when Hope left. At least PU was competitive in most of their games last year. In 2013, they often looked like a JV team.
PU’s OOC slate could be tough for them, but at least 2 wins should be expected with 3-1 a reasonable possibility (I think VT is too tough). You’ve got 3 winnable home games and a couple of possibly winnable road games. PU could get bowl eligible this year, though 5-7 is probably a safer bet.
LikeLike
College Baseball update (5/4). LSU retains its #1 ranking in all polls, while Illinois rises to #3 in the Collegiate Baseball poll.
http://www.lsusports.net/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=5200&ATCLID=210069489
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25173834/how-a-conference-title-game-could-affect-big-12-national-title-hopes
Stats on CCGs and whether the B12 is wise to add one for help making the CFP.
Relevant to my points above:
“What we heard is that if we don’t go to a championship game we’re at a disadvantage,” Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby told reporters last week in Dallas for the CFP spring meetings.
Except that’s not quite the interpretation CFP officials gave after hearing Bowlsby’s comments. CBSSports.com talked to several officials who stressed that a 13th game mattered last season with Ohio State beating Wisconsin in the Big Ten title game. More specifically, the score — 59-0 — was the biggest determining factor.
On to the stats:
So is the league overreacting?
One person close to the discussions told CBSSports.com, “Willing to bet the conference title game hurts the Big 12 more often than it helps.”
…
the point-spread favorite in conference title games has been upset almost a third of the time (17 in 56 total games — or 30.3 percent among Power 5 conferences from 1992-2014)
…
Six times [in 15 games] a Big 12 underdog either covered or won outright, an important consideration now with a human committee picking playoff teams.
…
Only 22 teams from the current Power 5 have won conference championship games (out of 65 schools). Of those 22, 10 have won national championships since 1992. Two of those 10 (Oklahoma, Texas) play in the current Big 12.
…
Deregulation could be a game-changer nationwide. According to that CBSSports.com research, almost two-thirds of all Power 5 championship games haven’t matched the two “best” teams (66.1 percent).
“Best” is generally defined as a league’s two highest-ranked teams. Twelve times in 15 years, the Big 12 didn’t match its two best teams. That rate was the highest among the Power 5.
…
The playoff is supposed to be populated by the four best teams judged by the selection committee. The Big 12 has taken that to mean only conference championship-game winners need apply.
The SEC’s rise to power was built on the fact it largely avoided upsets in those league title games. It has played to the Big Ten’s advantage having three upsets in four years. Ask Ohio State last season.
Meanwhile, Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick said he had no interest in adding an extra game as an independent.
“In the end our regular season is better than anybody else’s regular season,” Swarbrick told reporters this week.
Who’s right about the conference championship game?
“I just don’t understand how people who follow the sport, whether it’s the media or administration, don’t understand how clearly it cuts both ways,” Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany told ESPN.com last week.
They have tables of stats, but I’ll just give the highlights:
Favorite lost outright – 17 times in 56 games = 30.3 percent
Underdog covered or won – 28 times in 56 games = 50 percent
Top 5 team lost – 9 times in 56 games = 16.1 percent (lost a title contender)
Title game winner payed for national title – 21 times in 56 games = 37.5 percent (title boost)
Best teams didn’t meet – 37 times in 56 games = 66.1 percent
LikeLike
“Best” is a judgment. “Division winner” is an accomplishment. How many times did the championship (judged to be) favorite slip up, and what does that say about the reliability of judgments?
Didn’t OU and UT insist on being in the same division in part to avoid rematches and diluting the RRR? Remember how well the Ala/LSU do-over was received? Cross division rematches will/do happen, but they aren’t being selected. They are the result of win and advance theory in a bracket or group.
I guess World Cup should just alter how teams advance. Group of death? No worries. They all advance at someone else’s expense, based on subjective opinion. Oh yeah, FIFA haven’t changed the basic rules of that game to even have a few timeouts for those paying bazillions to sell in game commercial minutes. And that’s what we are talking about. Not trusting the value of the process itself and looking to be more attractive to TV bidders. Trying to create “better” matchups undermines the integrity of the competition, at least to me (and a surprising number of people I’ve talked to that I did not expect to agree).
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/118783/minneapolis-is-best-shot-for-midwest-title-game
Minneapolis is the B10’s only shot at hosting the NCG in the midwest in the near future.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25175404/no-conference-championship-game-for-big-12-commissioner-says
Now Bowlsby says no CCG for the B12.
On Tuesday, he essentially changed that opinion 180 degrees.
“I think we all believe that one year is not a long enough trial to draw any conclusions,” Bowlsby said. “We may find ourselves in better shape than some other conferences as a result of our model rather than in spite of our model.”
Bowlsby met with league athletic directors Tuesday morning and coaches Tuesday afternoon during the league’s spring meetings.
…
When asked if he overreacted to Long’s interpretation, Bowlsby said, “Maybe I did. I’m not immune to that.”
…
Bowlsby’s change of heart may have come down to the power of the present indicative plural. “Thirteen games are better than 12” suggests that would be the case every year in the CFP. If Bowlsby had said “13 games were better than 12,” that would have isolated the Big 12’s predicament to 2014.
LikeLike
UT/OU have spoken.
LikeLike
There are bound to be years that the lack of a championship game helps the Big 12. Whether it helps or hurts more remains to be seen, and only time will tell. No reason to rush into something after only one year.
If OSU wins the Big Ten championship by a small margin of victory, the Buckeyes don’t get into the playoff and it’s Baylor or TCU in that number 4 spot. Remember, the perception of the Big Ten was poor and a close victory wouldn’t have changed anything. When OSU pulled off a 59-0 win over a solid Wisconsin team with a backup QB n what was the easily the season’s most impressive victory, there was no way the Buckeyes were getting left out and the Big 12’s championship game or lack thereof became irrelevant. Even if TCU and Baylor faced off in a title game that week (I’m guessing it would have been a close game), there is nothing either could do to surpass OSU’s performance short of either team winning by 60.
Moving forward, the perception of the Big Ten has changed by virtue of OSU’s national championship. A one loss Big Ten won’t worry about having to win the conference title game by 60 anymore to be considered for the playoff and that could be a problem for the Big 12. As good as Baylor and TCU have become in recent years, it’s still OU, Texas, and a bunch of nobodies. That’s why I believe the Big 12 has to expand and why BYU (logistics aside) should be at the top of the list. BYU is no OU or Texas but it does have a national following, something the other Big 12 members can’t claim and won’t ever claim.
LikeLike
Tom,
“There are bound to be years that the lack of a championship game helps the Big 12. Whether it helps or hurts more remains to be seen, and only time will tell. No reason to rush into something after only one year.”
Agreed.
“If OSU wins the Big Ten championship by a small margin of victory, the Buckeyes don’t get into the playoff and it’s Baylor or TCU in that number 4 spot. Remember, the perception of the Big Ten was poor and a close victory wouldn’t have changed anything.”
1. OSU was ahead of Baylor before the CCG. Baylor beat KSU by 11. I’m not sure if OSU only winning by four would’ve been enough to bump Baylor up or not. It depends if the offense looked bad because of Jones or the D was soft and let WI stay in it, I suppose.
2. Baylor vs TCU was never a question for the committee. What OSU did had no impact on Baylor jumping past TCU. Baylor would’ve been #4 if OSU wasn’t.
“When OSU pulled off a 59-0 win over a solid Wisconsin team with a backup QB n what was the easily the season’s most impressive victory, there was no way the Buckeyes were getting left out and the Big 12’s championship game or lack thereof became irrelevant. Even if TCU and Baylor faced off in a title game that week (I’m guessing it would have been a close game), there is nothing either could do to surpass OSU’s performance short of either team winning by 60.”
Agreed.
“As good as Baylor and TCU have become in recent years, it’s still OU, Texas, and a bunch of nobodies. That’s why I believe the Big 12 has to expand and why BYU (logistics aside) should be at the top of the list. BYU is no OU or Texas but it does have a national following, something the other Big 12 members can’t claim and won’t ever claim.”
I don’t think expansion helps them at all.
LikeLike
I don’t think TCU/Baylor would have been that competitive, though. TCU absolutely blew a huge 4th quarter lead. If they had smacked Baylor around on a neutral field, when Baylor was rated higher than Wisconsin, then I think there would have been serious debate over the #4 spot.
If TCU had won, say, 35-10, are we that certain OSU would have made it in? Let’s not forget the Big Ten had a pretty terrible perception going into the postseason. It was a really impressive victory, but I thought at the time it said a lot more about Wiscy, and I think many felt the same, but without the Big 12 championship game there was no compelling reason to leave OSU out.
LikeLike
Ross,
“I don’t think TCU/Baylor would have been that competitive, though.”
It’s possible either way. Both of those teams were capable of blowing the other out if they got on a roll.
“If they had smacked Baylor around on a neutral field, when Baylor was rated higher than Wisconsin, then I think there would have been serious debate over the #4 spot.”
Yes, but for a whole different reason. TCU was ahead of OSU going in. TCU would’ve been B12 champs with an equivalent or better resume than OSU. A big win by TCU would’ve and should’ve kept them ahead of OSU.
“If TCU had won, say, 35-10, are we that certain OSU would have made it in?”
No, TCU would’ve gotten in. They needed to win the B12 outright to get in. Baylor needed a better win than OSU had to get in.
“Let’s not forget the Big Ten had a pretty terrible perception going into the postseason.”
The B12 was considered no great shakes either.
AP poll from 11/27/14 (should represent what a decent number of people were thinking):
4. TCU, 6. OSU
5. Baylor, 7. MSU
9. KSU, 11. WI
18. OU, 25. NE
33. WV, 27. MN
“It was a really impressive victory, but I thought at the time it said a lot more about Wiscy, and I think many felt the same, but without the Big 12 championship game there was no compelling reason to leave OSU out.”
I think most people nationally respected WI’s running game and defense. Both were elite units all season long. Holding Gordon to 76 yards (2.9 ypc) and a fumble should be impressive. Putting up 558 yards and 59 points on a top 5 defense should be impressive. And WI showed against LSU and AU that they were a solidly top 20 team.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25174829/ohio-state-spent-44m-oregon-38m-on-college-football-playoff-trips
A look at the costs to schools for each CFP game as well as the payouts.
LikeLike
Its official. Three more bowls in Orland, Tucson and Austin.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12829390/ncaa-adds-bowl-games-raising-total-42-sites-include-tucson-austin-orlando
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25176349/pac-12-mountain-west-discuss-future-bowl-in-australia
The P12 and MWC are discussing playing a bowl game in Australia.
LikeLike
The NFL has concluded that Brady and the Patriots are guilty of deflating footballs.
http://deadspin.com/wells-report-patriots-likely-deflated-balls-on-purpose-1702593820?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
LikeLike
Maybe they’ll suspend Brady for 1 whole pre-season game. That’ll teach him.
LikeLike
The game officials handle the ball after every play, and if there is any serious underinflation they will know it. Once they spot it, they have certified that it meets NFL standards for use. If the NFL goes after Brady and the Pats, they will have indicted their own officials and discreditied the integrity of the game.
Frankly, the inflation standard is stupid anyway. Players should be allowed to adjust the pressure anyway they like.
LikeLike
I suspect he will be suspended for more than that. And there is a reason there is a standard…under deflated balls are easier to throw and catch. That’s why they don’t play with Nerf balls.
The Patriots legacy continues to go down the drain.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“The game officials handle the ball after every play,”
So? They have much more on their minds than pressure testing the ball. They aren’t squeezing it to test the inflation.
“and if there is any serious underinflation they will know it.”
Says who? Is there any evidence that refs can reliably tell the psi in a ball from just normal ball handling during a game?
“Once they spot it, they have certified that it meets NFL standards for use.”
No, they certified them before the game. After that, they just assume the balls are OK. They aren’t making any sort of statement on the ball’s condition when they spot it.
“If the NFL goes after Brady and the Pats, they will have indicted their own officials”
They come out and admit the officials blew calls somewhat regularly. The officials aren’t supposed to be checking ball inflation during play, so why would the NFL worry about it?
” and discreditied the integrity of the game.”
As opposed to the people that blatantly cheated?
“Frankly, the inflation standard is stupid anyway.”
So are many/most rules in sports. But the rules are written down for a reason. You don’t get to choose which ones to follow.
LikeLike
I would hardly agree that the article came to that conclusion, or that the investigation even found as much. In fact, the only number we ever see referenced as far as Brady is concerned is his preference for 12.5 psi, which is the legal minimum. If anything, the inclusion of that particular piece of evidence would indicate that what Brady asked for was within the rules. I fail to see how anyone is pulling more than that from this. We have texts with absolutely no context beyond two guys more or less moaning about Brady wanting the balls inflated a certain way.
LikeLike
Interesting Tom did not share his text messages with the investigator.
LikeLike
Ross,
“I would hardly agree that the article came to that conclusion, or that the investigation even found as much. In fact, the only number we ever see referenced as far as Brady is concerned is his preference for 12.5 psi, which is the legal minimum. If anything, the inclusion of that particular piece of evidence would indicate that what Brady asked for was within the rules. I fail to see how anyone is pulling more than that from this. We have texts with absolutely no context beyond two guys more or less moaning about Brady wanting the balls inflated a certain way.”
http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/06/deflategate-new-england-patriots-investigation-wells-report
The report, released Wednesday, found “it is more probable than not that New England Patriots personnel participated in violations of the Playing Rules and were involved in a deliberate effort to circumvent the rules.” The report also states that it is probable Tom Brady “was at least generally aware of… the release of air from Patriots game balls.”
The report found that officials’ locker room attendant Jim McNally and equipment assistant John Jastremski “participated in a deliberate effort to release air from Patriots game balls after the balls were examined by the referee.”
The NFL is considering discipline for Brady, McNally and Jastremski, ESPN’s Adam Schefter reports.
LikeLike
I saw that this was their conclusion, but if you actually go into the report and read their basis for that conclusion, I simply do not see it. There is not one shred of evidence actually proving anyone did anything. Just a bunch of texts from equipment managers complaining about Brady requesting the balls be inflated a certain way. I bet a number of QBs have inflation preferences and their managers probably complain about it as well. That doesn’t prove everyone is circumventing the rules. Further, the report itself notes a legal inflation number (12.5 psi) that Brady requested. How can it admit that Brady preferred the legal minimum while also coming to the conclusion that he was involved in them going below that number? The proof they have supplied doesn’t seem to add up to what they are stating.
LikeLike
Ross,
“I saw that this was their conclusion, but if you actually go into the report and read their basis for that conclusion, I simply do not see it.”
I do. But I’m neutral towards Brady, not a fan of his.
“There is not one shred of evidence actually proving anyone did anything.”
You mean other than the balls being illegally underpressured after checking out OK before the game? And a whole lot of circumstantial evidence?
“Just a bunch of texts from equipment managers complaining about Brady requesting the balls be inflated a certain way. I bet a number of QBs have inflation preferences and their managers probably complain about it as well.”
I assume all QBs have a preference. I don’t think every team has a guy nicknamed “the deflator” who sends/receives messages about his needle, though. Nor do I think QBs on other teams suddenly start talking to their equipment guys on the phone and by text.
“That doesn’t prove everyone is circumventing the rules. Further, the report itself notes a legal inflation number (12.5 psi) that Brady requested. How can it admit that Brady preferred the legal minimum while also coming to the conclusion that he was involved in them going below that number?”
Asking for a legal number doesn’t mean that’s his actual preference. You can phrase things to say one thing but clearly imply something else. Plus we have no record of what personal conversations they may have had. And they never claimed that Brady masterminded it or directly ordered it. They merely said he probably knew about it in general.
“The proof they have supplied doesn’t seem to add up to what they are stating.”
You know they are aiming for the civil court standard (it’s more likely than not) and not the criminal standard (beyond a reasonable doubt), right?
LikeLike
Clemountainer on the Scout Cleveland Browns site posts the following:
Just heard from a good friend an someone who works in WVU atheletic office. That we can expect Cincy an ECU to be added to the Big 12 within the next month. Both schools taking a huge revenue cut to play with the big boys. The other 10 teams are to remain at 30 million a piece. Finally we get some regional opponents. THANK GOD Hail WV!
LikeLike
Because every realignment rumor coming out of WV has turned out to be true.
LikeLike
I can think of about a dozen schools with a better chance than ECU.
There’s reasons ECU was one of the last teams invited to the AAC.
LikeLike
It is also just not something they would do to have a separate pay structure indefinitely.
LikeLike
Oh, come on. There are “only” about nine that could be put ahead of ECU, excluding Cincinnati since they’d be part of the supposed expansion:
UCF, USF, UConn, Memphis, BYU, Colorado State, Air Force (FB only), Navy (FB only), and San Diego State.
Tulane, SMU, Houston, New Mexico, Boise State, and UTSA would be roughly as likely a candidate as ECU.
LikeLike
No, Tulane, Houston, New Mexico and Boise would all be more likely. UNLV would be more likely.
LikeLike
Quick! Someone check what The Dude is saying!
LikeLike
On that note, an interesting matchup agreed to here:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25178351/cincinnati-iowa-state-set-up-two-game-series-in-mens-basketball
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25176596/big-12-will-actually-have-one-true-champion-with-new-tiebreakers
The B12 officially has new tiebreakers, so no more co-champs.
BIG 12 CONFERENCE FOOTBALL TIEBREAKER
(To be used to determine the Conference champion and, if needed, the Conference’s Sugar Bowl representative in the event the champion is selected for a CFP semifinal)
10.24 Tiebreaker Procedure.
The following procedure will determine the Conference Champion. The tiebreaker will also be used to break other ties as necessary. For the avoidance of doubt, only Conference records will be used throughout the process:
a. If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the champion.
b. If three or more teams are tied, steps 1 through 4 will be followed until a determination is made. Once a team has been eliminated from a multi-team comparison, it is dropped from further comparisons. If only two teams remain tied after any step, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the Champion.
1. The conference records of the three or more teams will be compared against each other.
2. The conference records of the three or more teams will be compared against the next highest placed team(s) in the conference (4, 5 and 6….).
A. When comparing against the next highest placed teams, a two-way tie among the next highest placed teams will be broken by head-to-head before the comparison begins.
B. If more than a two-way tie exists among the next highest placed teams, record against the collective tied teams as a group will be used.
3. Scoring differential among the tied teams. The team with the lowest difference between points scored and points allowed in games vs. the tied teams are eliminated from consideration.
4. Draw (In the event steps 1-3 cannot break a multi team tie the champion will be determined by draw at the Conference office).
LikeLike
I get sending one name to the committee as champion in the same way you sent one to the BCS, but I very much dislike the idea of having a traditional set-up and not awarding championship status to all tied teams.
LikeLike
Agreed. I’d at least name Team A champion (indicates they won the tiebreaker) and Team B co-champion (same record but a lesser accomplishment). My guess is they’re afraid that if they award a co-champion, it’ll be viewed as less than having one clear champion.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/118882/big-ten-dominates-mcshays-way-too-early-2016-mock-draft
The sort of story it seemed like we’d never see again just a few years ago:
Big Ten dominates Todd McShay’s way-too-early 2016 mock draft
The Big Ten dominated Todd McShay’s way-too-early 2016 NFL mock draft with nine players projected to go in the first-round, including the top three picks and seven of the top 15.
Ohio State had five players in the mock draft, followed by Michigan State with two and Penn State and Nebraska each having one player selected.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/118839/top-big-ten-2016-draft-prospects
And here’s a look at who some of those 1st rounders might be (I’ve omitted the descriptions):
Ohio State DE Joey Bosa
Penn State QB Christian Hackenberg
Michigan State QB Connor Cook
Ohio State OT Taylor Decker
Ohio State QB Cardale Jones
Michigan State DE Shilique Calhoun
Ohio State RB Ezekiel Elliott
Ohio State LB Darron Lee
Michigan State OL Jack Conklin
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/98976/roundtable-big-12s-next-step
What’s next for the B12?
Max Olson: …
But the fact the Big 12 is going to team with the ACC to support the deregulation title games is not suddenly unimportant. They are expected easily achieve that change with the NCAA (which would allow the Big 12 to potentially add a title game as early as 2016), and I do think we’re going to revisit the topic of a Big 12 title game in two or three years.
All involved sure seem open to a title game, based on my discussions with Big 12 coaches and ADs in Phoenix this week, and I know several coaches see the title game as practically inevitable. I can’t blame them, really, for looking over the fence and recognizing the standards among Power 5 conferences (regarding scheduling, title games, etc.) aren’t at all uniform.
The Big 12 can only fix the Big 12, though, and I still won’t be shocked if the big fix is coming in a few years. It will take several more College Football Playoff results to know what to do with any semblance of certainty.
Brandon Chatmon: I agree 100 percent that the Big 12 needs to wait a while to get more CFP results before making major changes. But that doesn’t mean an immediate step should not be taken.
The Big 12 should mandate a Power 5 opponent. The conference should put this plan in place immediately with it taking effect in 2017, allowing teams two years to adjust to the change while adding a Power 5 teams to their future schedules (Kansas is the lone Big 12 team that doesn’t already plan to play a Power 5 opponent in 2017).
…
More importantly, a non-conference schedule mandate doesn’t feel like a rash move with the sole purpose of catering to the committee. Big 12 teams should be doing this anyway, and programs like Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia and TCU are already proactive in challenging themselves with Power 5 non-conference opponents.
Oklahoma’s battle with Tennessee, Texas’ opener against Notre Dame and Texas Tech’s trip to Arkansas this fall have the potential to help the conference as a whole, not just those teams, if the Big 12 is triumphant. I don’t think other teams should be able to ride that wave without challenging themselves as well.
Thus, an immediate Power 5 opponent mandate is the right move, and it allows the conference more time to understand if further action is really needed.
LikeLike
http://bloguin.com/thestudentsection/football/big-12-should-change-conversation-about-championship-games.html
The B12 should change the conversation.
Ironically, the Big 12 needs to double down on the idea behind “One True Champion.” While the catchphrase backfired something fierce on the league this season, the Big 12’s impulse to promote its round-robin schedule was actually dead-on.
The point of a conference championship game is to crown a winner when — unlike the Big 12 — all the teams in the league can’t play each other in the regular season. With a round-robin schedule, a championship game is extraneous: The conference champ is already guaranteed to have played the team deemed second-best in the league, as is the case in the rest of the Power 5.
Furthermore, the division format necessitates unbalanced scheduling, and we’ve seen how that plays out*:
* Since the SEC expanded to 14 teams in 2012, just one of the conference’s six division winners played a cross-divisional opponent with a winning conference record (SEC West champ Auburn versus Georgia in 2013);
* In the Big Ten’s first season with 14 teams in 2014, West winner Wisconsin caught Maryland (4-4 in conference play) and Rutgers (3-5) from the Big Ten East;
* ACC division winners have played a total of two cross-divisional opponents with winning conference records since expanding to 14 teams in 2013 (Georgia Tech versus Clemson in 2014 and Florida State versus Miami in 2013).
*Also, note that there have been no rematches from the regular season in conference championship games in the leagues that have expanded to 14 teams. That’s to be expected as in-conference scheduling gets thinned out.
I’d make a couple of counterpoints:
1. That’s a small sample size (6 seasons).
2. WI won the West by 2 games and beat both runners up head to head. They were 5-1 in division, with MN and NE 4-2. WI could’ve played and lost to OSU and MSU in crossover games and still would’ve won the West.
3. Actually, rematches should be expected. You’re playing 29% of the teams in the other division. Yes, losing a tough crossover makes it harder to win your division by hurting your record but it makes you more likely to win tiebreakers in your division. The B10 going to 9 games will be an even better test of this, because in addition to playing 43% of the other division the schedule will be parity-based so the top teams play each other more. I look for MSU to benefit from this while IA suffers.
LikeLike
Looking into CCG rematches:
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2010/12/who_wins_conference_championsh.html and a couple of other sources.
SEC:
6 times in 24 years (25%)
5 in 6 years from ’99-’04
Regular season winner was 5-1 in rematches
B12:
6 times in 15 years (40%)
4 straight from ’99-’02
Regular season winner was 4-2 in rematches
ACC:
4 times in 10 years (40%)
3 straight from ’07-’09
Regular season winner was 2-2 in rematches
P12:
3 times in 4 years (75%)
3 straight from ’12-’14
Regular season winner was 2-1 in rematches
B10:
2 times in 4 years (50%)
2 straight from ’11-’12*
Regular season winner was 0-2 in rematches
* OSU was the division champ but ineligible to play in the CCG. It still would’ve been a rematch as OSU also played NE during the season.
Total:
21 times in 57 games (36.8%)
Regular season winner was 13-8 (61.9%) in rematches
Since we know there were no rematches in 14 team P5 conferences:
12 teams – 21 times in 51 games (41.2%)
8 games schedule:
18 times in 47 games (38.3%)
Expected = 50% if rematches don’t matter (5 in division + 3 of 6 in crossovers)
9 games schedule:
3 times in 4 games (75%)
Expected = 67% if rematches don’t matter (5 in division + 4 of 6 in crossovers)
38.3/50 = 0.766
66.7/75 = 0.889
47 * 0.766 + 4 * 0.889 = 0.776
So experience has shown us that for 12 team P5 conferences we should expect rematches quite often, but only about 3/4 as often as the schedule math would dictate. In other words, losing to the winner of the other division reduces your odds of winning your own division by about 1/4. Teams with difficult locked crossover games are getting the short end of the stick.
14 team leagues are 0 for 6 so far in terms of having rematches. With 8 game schedules (6 + 2/7), you’d expect 2/7 of all games to be rematches (1.7 so far). Apply the same 1/4 reduction, and we’re down to 1.33 expected so far. The sample size is still really small, though, so we’ll have to wait and see. We’ll also have to see how 14 teams and 9 games works out.
LikeLike
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/05/task_force_says_it_has_secured.html#incart_2box_sports_index.ssf
UAB supporters have pledged almost $6M to help restore football.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25178382/pressure-mounting-for-college-football-playoff-system-to-go-to-eight-teams
According to Dennis Dodd, there’s already pressure on the CFP to expand.
How soon ’til they go to eight?
That’s not me asking for a playoff bracket expansion. That’s a person with close connections to the College Football Playoff wondering out loud this week at conference spring meetings in the desert. If a CFP-related person is asking, then the question must be out there more than we think:
…
TCU’s Gary Patterson — always ready with an opinion — suggested the quarterfinals begin in place of the conference championship games on that first Saturday in December.
“If you’re going to an eight-team playoff, you’re going to take the [conference] championship away,” he said. “And they’ll be OK with it because with eight teams that’s going to make up [financially] for the championship game anyway.”
…
In a twist that I hadn’t heard yet, Patterson also suggested those four quarterfinal losers then go on to play bowl games.
“Ask Wisconsin,” he said. “They get blown out in the Big Ten title game and then beat Auburn in the bowl game.”
Other options/considerations:
The Dec. 21 solution: …
Play the quarterfinals on the first day of the bowl season. Last year, that was Dec. 21. …
The first-round winners would then have 11 or 12 days to get ready for the semifinals. The championship game doesn’t have to be pushed back.
Six-team playoff: Last year, Oregon and Ohio State played 15 games. Amazingly, there was hardly any outcry over student-athlete welfare, one of the top NCAA initiatives these days.
…
Those extra games are going to be a huge hurdle in any playoff expansion discussion. In an eight-team playoff, four teams would be playing 15 games. Two would be playing 16.
A six-team playoff might lessen the inevitable outcry over player welfare. One source suggested a bracket where the top two teams get a bye. Teams seeded No. 3 through No. 6 would play first-round games. That still means two teams could — but not always — play 16 games. If the top two seeds win, they would play only 15.
I don’t buy 6 games as a legitimate solution. The seeding isn’t accurate enough to give 2 teams byes. In addition, it’s leaving money on the table when the CFP is all about being a money grab.
I don’t like the late December plan because it’s a terrible time for travel or to play outdoor home games in much of the country.
Replacing the CCGs with round 1 seems the best of the bad alternatives, in part because it eliminates the CCGs which I don’t like. It’s very short notice to put together the game, though.
Without CCGs, I wonder if everyone moves to 9 game schedules. Without that CCG to boost your resume, playing 1 less P5 team could really hurt you.
LikeLike
I don’t see conferences giving up the CCGs at this point, though. They are worth way too much.
LikeLike
That’s where Patterson’s plan kicks in. The idea is that the conferences get told that expand to 8, they have to drop the CCGs in exchange. As long as they all make more money from that deal (and they should), then do you think they’d agree?
LikeLike
But they won’t make money from that deal. CCG’s are worth a LOT, and leagues get 100% of the money. Whereas with the CFP, everyone, including mid-majors and (I think) even AA programs, gets a hand in the pot.
LikeLike
Matthew Smith,
“But they won’t make money from that deal. CCG’s are worth a LOT, and leagues get 100% of the money. Whereas with the CFP, everyone, including mid-majors and (I think) even AA programs, gets a hand in the pot.
They wouldn’t make more from that deal? Really? The current deal gets them $50M each plus money for making the games plus money from the Rose, Sugar and Orange as appropriate. CCGs get them roughly $2M per school for 54 schools (or even 64 with the B12). You don’t think an extra round of the playoff would be worth at least $150M per year?
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12688517/college-bowl-game-payouts-surpass-500-million-first-year-college-football-playoff
Total bowl payouts:
2012 – $300.8M
2013 – $309.9M
2014 – $505.9M
2014 – 2013 = $196M, but it grew by $9.1M the previous year anyway
Switching from the BCS to the CFP gained about $185M last year. That’s basically the value of the 2 semifinals. Shouldn’t the 4 quarterfinals be worth at least that much combined? If so, 5/6 of $180M is $150 or $2.3M per team for 64 schools. That leaves 1/6 ($30M) to spread over the G5.
But anyway, the question was assuming that they’d at least break even from the switch.
LikeLike
That’s a fun comparison point, $50M each for leagues but just $2M per school (and then $150M nationally from an expansion). Almost as if you’re explicitly trying to get an apples to oranges comparison. Looking just at a per school basis:
Uf you assume that 100% goes to the P5 (clearly it doesn’t), then you’re talking about $500M split 64 ways (ignoring ND btw), which is just $7.8M per school.
If instead you just take the bowl payment INCREASE of $200M, split over 64 P5 schools, you’re talking $3.1M per school, which isn’t all that much more than a CCG is worth.
If instead you cut that $200M figure by I dunno, let’s say 1/4 (for the $ going to the non P5 schools), you’re looking at $150M spread over 64 schools, or $2.3M.
And that $2.3M number is without making any adjustment for the current environment of MAJOR $ inflation in TV deals generally (i.e. a BCS renewal ALSO would have been worth more $ per team per year).
So, unless the $ figures thrown around are wildly inaccurate, this is a nice $ boost to teams’ bottom lines, but $50M per league per year is a major overstatement of MARGINAL revenue coming from the playoff. Could an 8 team playoff go from $500M nationally to $650M nationally? It’s possible. But by no means guaranteed. And as always, it comes with the risk of de-valuing the regular season and the existing CCG TV deals (not to mention the gate, concessions, field advertising etc revenue and the boost to league brand value that leagues get from putting on CCG’s)
Plus, from a P5 perspective, an expanded playoff would make it easier for the players suing them for antitrust to allege that they’re not even trying to make education any kind of priority AND they’re going whole hog into commercialization. And in today’s environment, antitrust implications seem to be relevant for just about any major decision being made.
LikeLike
Matthew Smith,
“That’s a fun comparison point, $50M each for leagues but just $2M per school (and then $150M nationally from an expansion). Almost as if you’re explicitly trying to get an apples to oranges comparison.”
That’s how they each pay out. $50M to the B12 is very different from $50M to the ACC/SEC/B10. The $2M per school was a rough estimate of what the various conferences get (it varies from conference to conference, obviously) from a CCG. It also was meant to show that you’d need $2M per B12 school as well, or $20M more.
“Uf you assume that 100% goes to the P5 (clearly it doesn’t), then you’re talking about $500M split 64 ways (ignoring ND btw), which is just $7.8M per school.”
Why would I do that when the CFP tells you exactly what they pay out? Each P5 conference gets $50M plus the bowl money from the Rose, Sugar and Orange as appropriate plus what the playoff spots pay. You can do the actual math.
$50M * 5 + 4 * $40M * 2/3 + 2 * $27.5M * 2/3 + 5 * $4M * 2/3 + 4 * $6M = $430.67M for the P5 on average = $6.73M per school on average
That’s for all 6 games.
2014:
ACC – 83.5/14 = 5.96M/school
B12 – 58M = 5.80M (note – no Sugar Bowl money)
B10 – 60M = 4.29M (note – no Rose Bowl money)
P12 – 60M = 5.00M (note – no Rose Bowl money)
SEC – 87.5M = 6.25M (note – no Sugar Bowl money)
Total = $349M = $5.45M per school
If the Rose and Sugar weren’t semifinals, add in another $160M
“If instead you just take the bowl payment INCREASE of $200M, split over 64 P5 schools, you’re talking $3.1M per school, which isn’t all that much more than a CCG is worth.
If instead you cut that $200M figure by I dunno, let’s say 1/4 (for the $ going to the non P5 schools), you’re looking at $150M spread over 64 schools, or $2.3M.
And that $2.3M number is without making any adjustment for the current environment of MAJOR $ inflation in TV deals generally (i.e. a BCS renewal ALSO would have been worth more $ per team per year).”
Didn’t you go through all that just to end up at the same basic place I did in terms of numbers? What’s your point?
“So, unless the $ figures thrown around are wildly inaccurate, this is a nice $ boost to teams’ bottom lines, but $50M per league per year is a major overstatement of MARGINAL revenue coming from the playoff.”
It’s a direct statement of exactly how the CFP pays the conferences. See the link above.
“Could an 8 team playoff go from $500M nationally to $650M nationally? It’s possible. But by no means guaranteed.”
Which means you could skip straight to the hypothetical question instead of all this fussing about exact numbers.
“And as always, it comes with the risk of de-valuing the regular season and the existing CCG TV deals”
The question specifically was about trading the CCGs for the expansion to 8 teams in a world where that was at least a revenue-neutral trade.
LikeLike
When people stop watching conference games important for school and conference reasons (local and regional) they may as well just watch the NFL.
Some conferences (with the larger) have the potential for a division championships being nearly equivalent to conference championships back in the era of 8 to 10 team conferences. There are only a limited number of schools that legitimately have a chance to consistently be in the chase at the end. The much larger number of schools will need to have lesser goals to chase, promote, and occasionally achieve during the multi decade gap between merical years. Hard to sell season tickets to teams with no real chance at achieving the only goal an open selection process is intended to achieve, that being a NC game that is popular to a generalized TV audience. Notice how much coverage Red Sox/Yankees get even when bad? Is that what college FB aspires to be?
LikeLike
Yes, you either do NYD for the quarters or have them the 1st or 2nd week in December.
6 is just a bad number for a lot of reasons.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/110839/the-sec-should-fight-to-get-rid-of-divisions
The SEC should push to eliminate divisions:
While the SEC took a revolutionary step forward in creating divisions and a conference championship in 1992, it’s time to take another step along the evolutionary ladder and blow up the division idea. You can even keep your conference championship game — until the College Football Playoff ultimately expands.
…
If you take away divisions, you can keep traditional rivalries and bring back some oldies.
…
So if you have eight conference games (which, come on, can the conference just go on ahead and move to nine league games?), you have four permanent opponents.
…
There are endless possibilities with this. And for anyone who says a team could get bombarded with a disproportionate schedule every year, I present you the current state of the SEC West.
Now, fans would get even better matchups more consistently. And players love the tougher games. They aren’t scared.
…
If you have nine conference games, then the league could discuss whether to have four or five permanent opponents; whatever!
Basically, take the top two conference records and throw them in Atlanta. You have your normal tiebreakers and finish things off with CFP rankings if it gets to that point.
…
Without divisions, you get better matchups, you keep traditional rivalries, you’re guaranteed to get the two best teams in Atlanta every year, and it makes the SEC that much stronger/tougher in the eyes of the college football playoff committee. Seems logical.
Especially with their insistence on 8 games, I’d love to see the SEC make this change. I think it’d be great for the players and the fans to have more diverse schedules than the current 6-1-1 plan allows. It would also help with the divisional balance issue they’ve had recently (all leagues with divisions face the same problem).
No they shouldn’t:
http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/101103/what-if-the-sec-had-no-divisions
The SEC should want absolutely nothing to do with a college football world absent divisions. Not just because the East versus West debate would be sorely missed. Not just because Vanderbilt would never stand a chance under that format, not that it had high hopes before. But if all 14 teams were thrown into one rowdy basket, the conference would devour itself.
There would be winners and losers, of course, but overall the SEC would see its chances of making the College Football Playoff diminish. The road to a league championship would be too muddied. Too often the teams that made it to Atlanta already would have played one another. Based on last year’s regular season, a committee might have chosen Mississippi State to play Alabama in the Georgia Dome. Had State dealt Alabama its second loss, there’s a chance no SEC team would have made the playoff. And somewhere Missouri would have been fuming mad.
In fact, the East as a whole would be in trouble.
…
During the regular season at least, the West would be the biggest beneficiaries of an SEC without divisions. In short, they’d stop beating up on one another so much.
…
But the only guaranteed winners in a division-less SEC would be the fans. The loss of historic rivalries has long been a sore spot for league supporters.
…
It’s an interesting concept, getting rid of divisions in the SEC. But the league has been so dominant for so long, why change it now? Its path to the playoff is clear. Why mess with that?
This argument makes less sense to me.
* They’d be less likely to make the playoff
Is he saying that the SEC has usually been getting #1 vs #3 or #4 in their CCG? Dropping divisions would make the CCG significantly harder to win? Is he actually arguing that a lack of divisional balance is a good thing?
* Too muddied
I don’t even know what he means, here. You’d still have a CCG and the best records make it. How is that unclear?
* Too many rematches
How does dropping divisions change this? Is it based on which games would be locked?
* The only guaranteed winners would be the fans
And that isn’t enough? It’s not a net plus or minus to the schools (some gain, some lose). Aren’t the fans and players the only other people that matter?
LikeLike
I was playing with conference W% numbers over the past 20 years:
1 Ohio State 0.796
2 Nebraska 0.675
3 Michigan 0.656
4 Wisconsin 0.623
5 Penn State 0.588
6 Michigan State 0.546
7 Iowa 0.525
8 Northwestern 0.45
9 Purdue 0.447
10 Maryland 0.419
11 Minnesota 0.344
12 Rutgers 0.319
13 Illinois 0.291
14 Indiana 0.200
Then I looked at how well teams do at home versus on the road. This is some combination of home field advantage, talent and coaching. The stat shown here is W% points above the average for (home W% – road W%). That average was 0.132, FYI. IL was only 0.028 better at home, though.
1 Indiana 0.0763
2 Iowa 0.0433
3 Nebraska 0.0403
4 Purdue 0.0373
5 Michigan 0.0313
6 Minnesota 0.0303
7 Wisconsin 0.0123
8 Michigan State 0.0003
9 Maryland -0.0067
10 Rutgers -0.0087
11 Penn State -0.0207
12 Ohio State -0.0557
13 Northwestern -0.0757
14 Illinois -0.1037
For OSU, I think it’s largely a function of them winning so much that the W% just doesn’t drop off as much on the road (83.8% at home, 76.2% on the road). Note that several of the most successful teams are clustered near 0.
Weird to me were IL and IN, though. IL had almost identical records at home and on the road which I think reflected their lack of talent and also the terrible wind Memorial Stadium generates. IN had a huge drop off on the road, perhaps because their talent was so subpar that they could only win at home (0.308 at home, only 0.100 on the road).
I also looked at some other conferences for comparison.
#1 in the P5:
OSU 0.796
FSU 0.794
UF 0.737
UT 0.720
OR 0.713
I think the higher W% for OSU and FSU are signs of almost unhealthy domination of their respective conferences compared to the greater balance in the other 3 conferences.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten
For B10 fans, the ESPN B10 blog has been doing a series of posts about QBs over the past week. Today was a bunch of top 3 lists for various attributes. It’s a fun way to kill some time.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25178559/pac-12-supports-football-early-signing-date-but-big-12-has-concerns
P12, MWC and MAC all support early signing period in December. The B12 has some concerns.
“While most recognize the early signing period has a number of advantages, there was a concern with how it would affect those high school teams in the state of Texas who would still be competing in the playoffs that overlapped with the 72-hour signing period,” Hocutt said.
Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said his conference will support the mid-December period.
“We’re absolutely not supportive of moving it toward as early as August,” Scott said. “We’ve got schools for whom your grades in first semester (as a high school senior) matter in terms of whether you get you get in (to a university) or not. We’d like to see as much track record as possible academically and allow for more mature discussions in general. But I think we’ve been persuaded the move from February to December is a compromise for some that have been pushing for earlier.”
Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson said his conference will support the recommendation. He said an early signing period will take out the “babysitting” that occurs in recruiting from early commitments.
…
Conferences are discussing the proposal at their spring meetings. Steinbrecher said he does not know if the recommendation will get passed by the CCA, assuming it’s voted on in June.
…
One possibility under discussion is opening up the April evaluation period so all coaches, including head coaches, can contact recruits. Right now that is a non-contact period, though assistant coaches often violate NCAA rules by “bumping” into players at schools while discussing the prospect with school officials.
“I would be a proponent of recruiting earlier, for sure,” USC coach Steve Sarkisian said. “I’m OK with (the December early signing period) as long as we can start recruiting a little earlier. If a kid can’t take an earlier official visit, things of that nature, that’s difficult.”
The idea of the early signing period is for players to end their recruitment after being committed for a while.
“But knowing the way we operate, it’s going to pick up the intensity on recruiting during the fall,” Steinbrecher said. “Are kids and coaches going to like that? Is there going to be more pressure for coaches to get access to kids earlier? I’m curious. When we started this committee, we didn’t have a Football Oversight Committee on board and now we do. I think we need to maybe get some feedback from the Football Oversight Committee so we can do this holistically instead of piece meal.”
…
If a player signs early and a coach leaves, “certainly there are waiver opportunities available and kids can make their case on that,” Steinbrecher said.
LikeLike
http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2015/05/07/us-youth-soccer-tries-gag-concussion-talk/70964108/
US Youth Soccer, which has 3 million players and is the nation’s largest youth sports organization, has asked its state officials not to talk to the news media about concussions in the sport.
The directive, in an April 24 email, was provided to The Courier-Journal by Louisville soccer officials who said the subject of concussions among young players needs more public discussion, not less.
…
The Centers for Disease Control estimates there were 10,436 emergency room visits each year from 2001-2009 from soccer-related traumatic brain injuries among those ages 19 and younger. A class-action lawsuit filed last August on behalf of soccer parents and former collegiate players asserts that nearly 50,000 high school soccer players sustained concussions in 2010 — more players than in baseball, basketball, softball and wrestling combined.
Football isn’t the only sport that has to worry about this.
LikeLike
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/05/ending_uab_football_painful_fo.html
An Alabama trustee is interviewed about UAB football and other issues. Shockingly, he really doesn’t see any problems with what has happened. He did have this mild criticism:
I think there’s no question this entire process could have been managed and communicated in a more effective way. And I believe that’s going to be one of the positive things that emerge from this controversy is that, in particular, the communications between certainly our board and our chancellor and our senior leadership within the Birmingham community have already been improved.
LikeLike
Getting football out of the way helped clear communication lines in sure.
LikeLike
http://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-athletics/2015/05/53474/buckeye-mens-lacrosse-upset-two-time-defending-national-champion-duke
I link this for 2 reasons. First is to brag about OSU beating Duke in the NCAA M LAX tournament. Duke was the #5 seed and 2-time defending champs. It was Duke’s first opening-round loss since 1995 (they’ve made 16 tourney appearances since then).
But I mainly link it for the chart in the comments showing the growth in college lacrosse in the past 20 years.
http://deadspin.com/5959185/no-lacrosse-is-not-a-regional-game-watch-how-its-conquering-america
After some searching, this is the source of the LAX growth image. It also breaks it down by region.
LikeLike
College Baseball update (5/11)
LSU remains #1 in all polls/rankings after sweeping Mizzou this weekend. NCBWA has not been released yet.
Illinois continues its meteoric rise to #2 in the Collegiate Baseball poll and is a consensus top five team in other polls.
The top five are identical in the polls/rankings, though in different spots, with the exception of LSU. The top five includes LSU, Illinois, TCU, UCLA, & Louisville.
LikeLike
I believe IL has won 24 straight now. It’s ridiculous. Hopefully they haven’t used up their best stuff before the postseason.
Apparently the B10 is still likely to get 5 or 6 teams in the NCAA field, which would be a refreshing change.
LikeLike
NCBWA poll is out.
1. LSU
2. Louisville
3. TCU
4. UCLA
5. Illinois
LikeLike
Illinois good at baseball? Never thought I’d see the day, but glad I have.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12867594/punishments-handed-tom-brady-new-england-patriots-deflategate
The NFL says Tom Brady gets 4 games without pay and the pats lose $1M and 2 draft picks, 2016 1st round and 2017 4th round.
“Despite our conviction that there was no tampering with footballs, it was our intention to accept any discipline levied by the league,” Kraft said. “Today’s punishment, however, far exceeded any reasonable expectation. It was based completely on circumstantial rather than hard or conclusive evidence.
“We are humbled by the support the New England Patriots have received from our fans throughout the world,” the statement said. “We recognize our fans’ concerns regarding the NFL’s penalties and share in their disappointment in how this one-sided investigation was handled, as well as the dismissal of the scientific evidence supported by the Ideal Gas Law in the final report.”
Brady’s agent said he would appeal the suspension to commissioner Roger Goodell, which the quarterback has three days to do.
Look for Kraft to appeal momentarily. Is he aware that people have been convicted of crimes on circumstantial evidence, let alone meeting the much lower burden in civil court? And how does he explain the ideal gas law impacting the Pats’ balls significantly m,ore than the Colts’ balls?
Click to access PatriotsWellsReport.pdf
As the Exponent report says:
In sum, the data did not provide a basis for us to determine with absolute certainty whether
there was or was not tampering as the analysis of such data ultimately is dependent upon
assumptions and information that is not certain. However, based on all of the information
provided to us, particularly regarding the timing and sequencing of the measurements
conducted by the game officials at halftime, and on our testing and analyses, we conclude
that within the range of game characteristics most likely to have occurred on Game Day, we
have identified no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts
for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls as compared to the
loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls measured during halftime of the AFC
Championship Game.
And shockingly, when they ran deflation tests, they found it took 60-70 seconds and they dropped about 0.76 psig. How much more did the Pats’ balls deflate than the Colts’ balls in the first half? About 0.7 psig. What a coincidence. And the people at Exponent are very smart. They considered every reasonable variable and tested for them. These guys do this for a living, dealing with all kinds of industrial incidents/accidents/tragedies. They are used to doing work that has to stand up in court for multi-million dollar lawsuits. Kraft might want to be careful before he says they’re wrong.
LikeLike
The NFL Rule Book, http://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2014-nfl-rulebook/, does not make any reference to temperature. This is an absurdity because the ideal gas law, pV = nRT, indicates that pressure is proportional to the absolute temperature. The officials are supposed to measure ball pressures before the game in the locker room, so by implication the ball temperatures are initially around 67 to 71F (Wells Report). Brady likes the ball to be at minimum pressure, 12 ½ psi, and in the course of a winter game the ball pressure would necessarily fall beneath the minimum.
To their credit, the Wells staff actually knows this and tried to account for the effect of the game day temperature. But they don’t quite tumble to the fact that having been set at the legal minimum, the Patriots ball pressures would have been below the rule limit during much of the game.
Moreover, the Referee is responsible for determining the suitability of the ball throughout the game. He and other officials handle the ball and inspect it after every plany. At least they are supposed to do so. By implication, he certifies that the ball meets the rule each time it is put into play.
From the last page of the Wells’ report (https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/investigative-and-expert-reports-re-footballs-used-during-afc-championsh.pdf):
“13. In sum, the data did not provide a basis for us to determine with absolute certainty whether
there was or was not tampering as the analysis of such data ultimately is dependent upon
assumptions and information that is not certain. However, based on all of the information
provided to us, particularly regarding the timing and sequencing of the measurements
conducted by the game officials at halftime, and on our testing and analyses, we conclude
that within the range of game characteristics most likely to have occurred on Game Day, we
have identified no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts
for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls as compared to the
loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls measured during halftime of the AFC
Championship Game.”
So Brady is suspended four games (Garafolo happy), and the Pats are fined $1M and lose next year’s first round pick on suspicion. The dereliction of the game officials goes unmentioned. The stupidity of the Rule goes unmentioned.
The idiocy of NFL punishments continues. The NFL competes with the NCAA for most inane punishments.
Brady and the Pats will appeal. They should sue for libel.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“To their credit, the Wells staff actually knows this and tried to account for the effect of the game day temperature. But they don’t quite tumble to the fact that having been set at the legal minimum, the Patriots ball pressures would have been below the rule limit during much of the game.”
That’s because it wouldn’t be a cheating issue if the weather reduced the pressure. They were asked to determine if people tampered with the balls to reduce the pressure below the limit.
“Moreover, the Referee is responsible for determining the suitability of the ball throughout the game. He and other officials handle the ball and inspect it after every plany. At least they are supposed to do so. By implication, he certifies that the ball meets the rule each time it is put into play.”
No, he doesn’t. They place the ball and might notice a major defect. That’s it. There is no way you can hold them responsible for air pressure at all times unless you want them to stop and measure it between every play.
From the last page of the Wells’ report (https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/investigative-and-expert-reports-re-footballs-used-during-afc-championsh.pdf):
“So Brady is suspended four games”
He shouldn’t have lied about knowing those guys and refused to let the investigators see his text messages.
“and the Pats are fined $1M and lose next year’s first round pick on suspicion.”
No, more on repeat offender status and a clear circumstantial case that Pats’ employees intentionally broke NFL rules.
“The dereliction of the game officials goes unmentioned.”
1. Because there wasn’t any.
2. Wells wasn’t asked to investigate the refs.
“The stupidity of the Rule goes unmentioned.”
Wells wasn’t asked to investigate the rule.
“Brady and the Pats will appeal.”
Of course they will.
“They should sue for libel.”
The burden of proof is impossible for them. First, the NFL would have to be wrong about them cheating (they aren’t wrong). Second, they’d have to prove the NFL knew it was wrong or had no basis at all (negligence). Third, they’d have to show harm.
LikeLike
ICYMI
orthern Kentucky University, after reclassifying to Division I and joining the Atlantic-Sun Conference in 2012, is moving up in college athletics.
The Norse on Monday announced a shift to the Horizon League “to align with similar aspirational institutions,” school president Geoffery Means said, starting with the 2015-2016 academic year.
http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/2015/05/11/northern-kentucky-announces-move-to-horizon-league/27122277/
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12867323/all-conferences-operate-same-format
A blog post gives opposing views on whether all P5 conferences should have to schedule the same way (9 conf games + 1 OOC P5 game + CCG). Ted Miller says yes, for fairness. Especially in regards to the CFP committee having to choose 4 teams. Mark Schlabach prefers regional rivalries and the variety that CFB offers compared to the NFL. It’s worth reading both sides.
Personally, I think I come down in the middle. I’d like to see all P5 conferences agree to play at least 10 P5 games. That can be 9 in conference plus 1 OOC or 8 and 2, I don’t care. That let’s schools preserve OOC rivalries while still giving all teams a difficult schedule. I’d also like to see the B12 asked to either play a CCG or add an 11th P5 game to their schedules. If they don’t, I think that lack of an 11th P5 game should be used against them in CFP discussions.
LikeLike
Schools should be evaluated individually.
All P5 are not created the same. Its ridiculous to evaluate by conference. So what if Wisconsin played Duke (in a typical Duke year), Vanderbilt and Washington St. out of conference while TCU played Boise, BYU and UCF?
LikeLike
bullet,
“Schools should be evaluated individually. All P5 are not created the same. Its ridiculous to evaluate by conference. So what if Wisconsin played Duke (in a typical Duke year), Vanderbilt and Washington St. out of conference while TCU played Boise, BYU and UCF?”
Agreed. However, it’s hard to write a black and white rule that way. Feel free to name a metric that gives a fair representation of what an opponent is and is known in advance so schools can schedule appropriately. I’d be happy to work with that metric, but P5 is shorthand for that. We all know a few P5 teams don’t really count and few G5 teams do.
The point is, I want to balance schedules nationally. If some conferences play 8 games and other 9, that’s fine. I want to count their total P5 games and make that balance out. That let’s OOC rivalries in the P5 count as a 9th game for the ACC and SEC. People will notice if you always play the P5 scrubs OOC and that’ll cost you in the CFP race, bowl selection and attendance.
Ideally, everyone would play these schedules:
top 25 (25) – 9 conference games, 1 top 25, 1 top 50, 1 top 100
top 50 (25) – 9 conference games, 1 top 25, 1 top 100, 1 bottom G5
top 100 (50) – 9 conference games, 1 top 25, 1 top 50, 1 cupcake (good I-AA OK)
bottom G5 (~30) – 9 conference games, 1 top 50, 1 bottom G5, 1 I-AA cupcake
How to pre-define the tiers for scheduling is the problem.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25184097/maryland-north-carolina-highlights-2015-big-tenacc-challenge-schedule
The B10/ACC Challenge match-ups are out.
Here’s the schedule:
—– Nov. 30 —–
Clemson at Minnesota
Wake Forest at Rutgers
—– Dec. 1 —–
Maryland at North Carolina
Virginia at Ohio State
Michigan at North Carolina State
Purdue at Pittsburgh
Northwestern at Virginia Tech
Miami at Nebraska
—– Dec. 2 —–
Indiana at Duke
Louisville at Michigan State
Wisconsin at Syracuse
Notre Dame at Illinois
Florida State at Iowa
Penn State at Boston College
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25184222/uab-president-reinstating-football-decision-will-come-by-june-1
A decision on UAB football is expected by June 1.
LikeLike
President says no press conference. Announcement will be by email, web and social media.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12874730/bobby-bowden-former-florida-state-seminoles-coach-calls-jameis-winston-embarrassment-school
Bobby Bowden called Jameis Winston an embarrassment to FSU in many ways.
“I think it’s a consensus among Florida State fans and boosters that he was an embarrassment in a lot of ways to the university,” Bowden said on ESPN’s The Paul Finebaum Show. “He won a lot of ballgames, probably one of the best football players that ever attended Florida State, but he hurt himself off the field. The good news is he’s young enough to get over that. He just can’t make those junior high school decisions that he made when he was in college.”
He’s probably right, although a little bitter and shouldn’t have said anything.
Worse, Winston’s new coach Lovie Smith jumped in to defend Winston.
On Wednesday, Buccaneers coach Lovie Smith defended his rookie quarterback.
“That’s a strong statement to make about any young man, that he is an embarrassment,” Smith told reporters. “Jameis Winston is not an embarrassment, and I don’t think Bobby Bowden is speaking for Florida State in making a statement like that. Normally, when you’re in the family, you protect the family.”
I think Smith should’ve just ignored it. Winston is a bog boy and can take some criticism. This just extends the story. And why would Bowden consider Winston in his family? He didn’t coach him and FSU booted Bowden. Does he owe FSU anything?
LikeLike
Bowden just said what anyone who wasn’t an FSU homer would say. He was a terrible embarrassment. And FSU’s coddling of him embarrassed the university as well.
He dampened the enthusiasm for the team this year according to my relatives in Tallahassee.
LikeLike
http://regressing.deadspin.com/how-title-ix-actually-makes-money-for-some-schools-1704245381/+kylenw
A little heavy on economics, but an interesting read. Basically, shows how schools make money with women’s sports.
LikeLike
That is horrendous analysis. The idea that UA-B couldn’t find 8 other students who would pay full tuition to replace the 8 members of the women’s bowling team that are receiving partial scholarships is absurd.
LikeLike
Hate to be the one to reveal this nugget. MOST colleges do not admit as many freshmen as they have space for. Most do not say we are admitting X freshmen then take the best X. Instead most colleges set a standard for admission and accept everyone meeting the standard. So yes normally when a school adds 8 athletes they fill 8 spots that would otherwise be vacant.
LikeLike
Except they could still fill those 8 spots with students who pay full tuition, especially since athletes have lower admission standards anyways.
LikeLike
The idea that UA-B couldn’t find 8 other students
The point is, the only reason those eight women were going to UAB was to bowl. They’re in addition to students who were already going. For example, I used to work with a someone who’s daughter went to bowl at Arkansas St. She had to take out loans to cover the percentage of out of state tuition her scholarship didn’t cover. If she wasn’t bowling, she wouldn’t be going to ASU.
LikeLike
But she got to bowl in the NCAA tournament. Red Wolves are bad ass on the lanes.
LikeLike
Just once, in 2008. Second place finish I believe.
LikeLike
The point is, the only reason those eight women were going to UAB was to bowl.
And my point is that UAB could have found 8 women who didn’t bowl that would have been willing to pay full tuition.
LikeLike
But you’re wrong unless UAB is admitting all the freshmen they have room for.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/82048/acc-has-interest-in-overseas-games
The ACC is interested in overseas games in various sports.
Also this:
* Swofford had no real update on the possibility of an ACC Network, except to say discussions are ongoing. “We anticipated it would be a two- to three-year-stretch in terms of getting to any end point that we get to. We’re right on schedule with that. That discussion is right where we anticipated it being at this given point in time and moving well. We’ve got a ways to go, but we’re pleased with where we are in our process.”
…
* Though scheduling was not discussed at length, Swofford was asked for a model that allowed teams to play each other more often while remaining at eight league games. Swofford mentioned putting cross-over rivals in the same division and then eliminating the permanent cross-over game. Yes, that would require divisions to be redone. No, there is no momentum for that, but it’s fun to discuss anyway.
Current split:
Boston College / Virginia Tech
Clemson / Georgia Tech
Florida State / Miami
Louisville / Virginia
North Carolina State / North Carolina
Syracuse / Pittsburgh
Wake Forest / Duke
New divisions?:
UNC, Duke, NCSU, WF, UVA, VT, UL
FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, SU, Pitt, BC
They aren’t well balanced.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12893128/ncaa-committee-calls-30-second-shot-clock-series-proposals-speed-games
NCAA proposes some rule change for hoops:
Proposal to increase possessions and pace of play:
1. Reduce the shot clock to 30 seconds.
Proposed rules to reduce physicality:
1. Strict enforcement of defensive rules.
2. Providing offensive players same principles of verticality protections as defensive players.
3. Move restricted-area arc out from 3 to 4 feet.
Proposed changes related to timeouts:
1. Number of timeouts reduced from 5 to 4, with no more than 3 being carried over into second half
2. Stricter enforcement of resumption of play coming out of timeouts and after a player has fouled out.
3. Team timeouts within 30 seconds before media timeouts will become media timeouts, with exception of first team timeout in second half.
Getting back to enforcing the rules on D like they did in 2013-4 should help a lot. And any reduction in late TOs is a great thing.
LikeLike
http://pro32.ap.org/article/3-proposals-extra-points-table-nfl-owners
NFL owners will consider 3 potential changes to the XP:
New England has suggested snapping the ball from the 15 for a one-point kick, meaning a 32- or 33-yard conversion, or placing the ball at the 2-yard line for a 2-point try.
Philadelphia proposes snapping from the 15 for the kick, but moving the ball to the 1 for a 2-point conversion. The Eagles also want the defense to be able to score the points if it returns a turnover on the 2-point conversion to the other end zone.
The competition committee offers the same as the Eagles, except the 2-point conversion would come from the 2-yard line.
24 of 32 owners have to approve.
LikeLike
The choice should be going for 2 from the 2 or an unopposed a dropkick from the 20.
LikeLike
Are you limited by the declared starting spot? Or can you fake a 1pt from distance and score 2 by running/passing? What about a QB shotgun drop kick?
This is stupid. Move the spot if you need to but don’t try to create a set of new rules trying to have your cake and eat it, too. Or just narrow the goal posts and leave the rest alone.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“Are you limited by the declared starting spot? Or can you fake a 1pt from distance and score 2 by running/passing?”
I suppose you could, but running a regular play from the 2 has a much higher success rate than a fake kick from the 15. If you fumble the snap I guess you could still try to run or pass for 2.
LikeLike
They come up with a lot of stupid stuff.
Just make a TD 7 points unless you want to take a point off the board and go for 2. It would speed up the game and eliminate something that adds no value.
LikeLike
Frank – I thought you might like the latest MLB mock draft by Baseball America.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/draft/mlb-mock-draft-2015-version-2-0/
It has your White Sox taking your Illini LHP Tyler Jay with the 8th pick.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25182077/post-spring-top-25-ohio-state-will-begin-2015-where-it-left-off-in-2014
Dennis Dodd’s post-spring top 25:
1. OSU
2. TCU
3. OR
4. AL
5. Baylor
6. MSU
7. AU
8. USC
9. FSU
10. UGA
12. WI
SEC – 9 (6 top 15, 3 in the 20s)
P12 – 5 (2 top 10, 3 more in top 20)
ACC – 4 (2 top 15)
B10 – 3
B12 – 2
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25185766/friday-five-second-opinions-on-the-post-spring-top-25
And 5 teams his colleague thinks Dodd is most wrong about:
14. MS St too high
2. TCU too high
17. GT too low
9. FSU too high
23. AR too low
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25185096/nick-saban-suggests-either-have-bowl-games-or-have-playoffs-not-both
Nick Saban thinks the CFP hurt the bowls and something should be done.
“I learned what I feared the most would happen,” Saban told AL.com while at a golf tournament in Birmingham. “All the attention, all the interest would be about the four teams in the playoffs, which is exactly what happened, which was great to be a part of.
“But what I was most fearful of is college football is unique. A lot of young men get a lot of positive self gratification from being able to go to a bowl game and that’s always been a special thing. That by having a playoff we would minimize the interest in other bowl games, which I think is sort of what happened and I hate to see that for college football.”
…
“Maybe we need to go one way or the other,” Saban said. “Either have bowl games or have playoffs but not try to have both.”
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25187116/jeff-long-on-saban-playoff-comments-coaches-not-aware-of-real-world
Meanwhile, the CFP committee chairman (Jeff Long) thinks otherwise.
“Well, I think sometimes coaches, particularly those at the highest level, I’m not sure how aware they are of what’s really going on out there in the real world,” Long said, per a transcription by al.com. “You know, bowl games, they keep adding bowl games. And I think the television interest for the games is higher than ever before, so I think that’s not only the College Football Playoff, but as we’ve gone through some of those bowl games.
“So I’m not sure it’s having that effect.”
The author then went on to make a couple of points:
At the very least, Saban’s suggestion that college football might eventually have to choose between holding playoffs and holding bowl games is a nonstarter, given that — as Long points out — TV ratings for non-playoff bowls were up overall, and that such games continue to be added to the bowl season docket, not removed.
But if the bowls Saban had in mind were specifically the BCS-level games who became part of the New Year’s Six rotation and didn’t host playoff semifinals, he might have a point. According to Sports Media Watch, the four “other” New Year’s Six games — Chick-Fil-A, Fiesta, Orange, and Cotton — each posted a TV rating lower than all but one of the 72 BCS bowls* played during the 15-year BCS era. Maybe the New Mexico Bowl isn’t affected by the playoff … but are we sure that in years when they aren’t hosting a semifinal, the Orange, or Fiesta, or even Rose or Sugar isn’t being diminished?
In the end, one season isn’t enough to make any firm conclusions. … The feeling here is that Saban’s concerns are overblown
…
But that doesn’t mean there aren’t concerns, and if the other four New Year’s Six games grow into complete afterthoughts, Saban may yet still prove to have a point — however “aware” coaches may or may not be.
LikeLike
The point is that they ought to make 4 of the 6 playoff games.
LikeLike
I don’t know if Saban is in the 8-team camp. Many coaches aren’t.
I still think the numbers will roughly balance out over 3 years. The real test will be the next 2 years with the 12/31 semis. The Peach and Cotton should benefit since they weren’t BCS bowls. The Fiesta and Orange might lose a little. The Rose and Sugar should be fine except for the loss of tradition.
2014:
NCG – 18.9
Sugar – 15.2 (semi)
Rose – 14.8 (semi)
Cotton – 5.2 (1/1 – 2 P5)
Orange – 5.0 (12/31 – 8:00)
Fiesta – 4.6 (12/31 – 4:00 – G5)
Peach – 3.4 (12/31 – 12:30)
Old averages:
NCG – 16.0
Sugar – 8.1
Rose – 11.9
Cotton – 4.5
Orange – 7.6
Fiesta – 8.7
Peach – 4.6
The Sugar only needs to average a 4.6 the next 2 years to break even.
Rose – 10.5 (we all knew the Rose would have the biggest risk)
Cotton – 4.2 (any semi will do it all by itself)
Orange – 8.9 (a 13 and another 5 would suffice)
Fiesta – 10.8 (a 14 and a 7.5 would suffice)
Peach – 5.2 (any semi will do it all by itself)
As I said, the Peach and Cotton will be big winners. The Orange and Sugar should break even pretty easily. The Rose could still break even based on its time slot and history. The Fiesta might lose a little, it really depends on their semi.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/24891415/college-football-attendance-home-crowds-drop-to-lowest-in-14-years
School by school analysis of CFB attendance last year. Also some conference notes.
Football Bowl Subdivision crowds for home games averaged 43,483 fans per game, down 4 percent from 2013 and the lowest since 42,631 in 2000, according to a CBSSports.com analysis of NCAA attendance data. This marked the sixth straight season crowds were below 46,000 since they peaked at 46,456 in 2008.
…
This was the first year the NCAA counted attendance from six new FBS schools: Georgia Southern, Old Dominion, Charlotte, Appalachian State, Georgia State and Texas San Antonio. But even when removing those teams from the calculation, the average for returning FBS schools (44,544) would be the lowest since 2002.
…
The biggest increases among Power Five schools: Texas A&M (21 percent), Maryland (14 percent), LSU (11 percent), Mississippi State (10 percent), Rutgers (9 percent), Florida State (9 percent) and UCLA (nine percent). Texas A&M, LSU and Mississippi State expanded their stadiums this season. Maryland and Rutgers were new Big Ten members.
The biggest decreases in the Power Five: Purdue (28 percent), Pittsburgh (17 percent), Virginia (15 percent), Kansas (10 percent), Arizona State (9 percent) and Oklahoma State (8 percent).
…
The University of Alabama at Birmingham, which recently became the first major program to drop football in 19 years, had the second-largest FBS increase in 2014. The Blazers averaged 21,841 fans per game, better than 36 other FBS programs and up 107 percent from last year.
Conference breakdown
SEC: Once again it led the country in attendance, averaging a record 78,018 fans. Aided by expanded stadiums and Tennessee’s fan resurgence, the SEC was up 3 percent. Florida, South Carolina, Kentucky and Vanderbilt were the only SEC teams with a decrease.
Big Ten: Average attendance was 66,939, down from 70,431 last year. That’s largely because of introducing Maryland and Rutgers attendance figures — which are below most Big Ten schools — into the conference average. Nine of the 14 Big Ten schools improved their crowds.
Big 12: There was a slight dip (1 percent) to 57,624 fans per game. Six of 10 Big 12 schools increased crowds. For the second straight year, the Big 12 had its smallest average since 2005.
Pac 12: Crowds dropped 2 percent to 52,758 and they are down 10 percent since peaking in 2007. Pac-12 attendance leader UCLA ranked 19th nationally. Only four of 12 conference schools had an increase: UCLA, Arizona, Utah and Washington State. A couple of schools’ decreases were very minor.
ACC: This league again was last among Power Five schools at 50,016, although its average was up 1 percent in the first year Notre Dame played a condensed schedule against the ACC. Fresh off a national championship, Florida State saw its crowds increase by 9 percent. Half of the ACC’s teams had their attendance rise.
Numbers for all schools are included, including the percentage change from last year.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25184989/ohio-state-sec-lead-fbs-attendance-rankings-for-2014
A more detailed look at the top schools and how the conferences fared.
Top 30 broken down by conference:
SEC: 13
Big Ten: 7
Big 12: 3
Pac-12: 3
ACC: 3
Independents: 1
Overall, Division I FBS teams saw an average of 1,002 fewer fans attend games home games last season. Average neutral-site attendance (-2,499) and bowl game attendance (-4,617) were also down.
The B10 had 3 of the top 5 and 4 of the top 10. Texas was the only non-SEC and non-B10 team to make the top 10, with OU, FSU and Clemson making the top 15. All but Vandy from the SEC made the top 30. Nobody else can match the SEC’s depth in attendance.
LikeLike
Average attendance has been hurt by realignment in most conferences. Despite going down with the last 2 additions, average B1G attendance is up 3.5% compared to the original 10 members. The SECs 4 additions added 0.8% while the PAC12 is -4.3% compared to the PAC8. The ACC is -3.9% with the last 6, but up 3% if you go back to FSU as the first addition.
The B12 average is -10.7% compared to its original members. Increased attendance by members lost to the SEC add about 3% to the loss, unlikely to have occurred in the B12. Still by far the worst in realignment. The B12 is also the only P5 conference with low attendance from its best teams. TCU and Baylor only beat out Kansas at the bottom of the conference attendance list. With both constrained by the smallest stadiums in the B12 this will not change unless OK and TX regain football dominance.
LikeLike
The numbers are also tough to compare due to stadium changes. Many have expanded, but some have decreased in capacity over the years.
The overall NCAA number is certainly impacted by all the additions to I-A.
LikeLike
The home attendance rankings for the most recent expansion teams:
2. Texas A&M (B-12 to SEC) 105,123
10. Nebraska (B-12 to B1G) 91,249
24. Mizzou (B-12 to SEC) 65,285
34. West Virginia (B-East to B-12) 56,686
39. Louisville (B-East to ACC) 52,972
43. Rutgers (B-East to B1G) 50,632
48. Maryland (ACC to B1G) 46,981
50. Utah (MWC to P-12) 46,437
52. TCU (MWC to B-12) 44,719
56. Pitt (B-East to ACC) 41,315
57. Syracuse (B-East to ACC) 40,447
61. Colorado (B-12 to P-12) 37,778
The home attendance for the bridesmaids and those mentioned as possible B-12 candidates.
BYU (57,141)
UCF (37,812)
Memphis (33,851)
Boise St. (32,504)
San Diego St. (32,406)
USF (30,694)
Cincy (28,840)
UConn (27,461)
East Carolina (44,786) [I know the Pirates never even got mentioned, but they have great home attendance]
LikeLike
Pitt at 41k seems like a stretch. They look to be drawing closer to 25-30k.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/05/16/big-ten-conference-commissioner-jim-delany-tax-return/27438419/
The story is mostly about Jim Delany’s pay for 2013, but the BTN is mentioned late:
The return also provided a window on the Big Ten Network’s financial performance and impact for the conference. On a pre-tax basis, the conference’s share of the network’s profits was nearly $12.4 million. That’s in addition to the annual rights fee the conference gets from the network.
This new figure means the conference’s share of the network’s profits was about $1 million less than it was in fiscal 2013, but the tax return showed that the conference now has accumulated more than $33.7 million in profit shares from the network in a holding company for future use.
LikeLike
“…but the tax return showed that the conference now has accumulated more than $33.7 million in profit shares from the network in a holding company for future use.”
Getting prepared to purchase back what Fox owns when it comes available? Preparing for a big BTN ten year birthday party in future?
LikeLike
Or building a new studio and getting new equipment to provide the best viewing experience? Or future marketing costs in Maryland and New Jersey?
LikeLike
Thought Fox provided infrastructure.
LikeLike
My guess is they are saving it for exansion
LikeLike
profit shares from the network in a holding company for future use
They could be holding this back to help smooth out the distribution of profits. ADs budget for an entire year, so it makes sense help protect from any ups and downs in the business cycle.
LikeLike
Other than the profit component of BTN (which it appears they may be holding onto part or all of it), conference distributions aren’t very cyclical at all. Any time a new television contract be it for the conference or the NCAA tournament is signed, schools have a pretty darn good idea of how much money to expect for the next decade plus.
LikeLike
Other than the profit component of BTN (which it appears they may be holding onto part or all of it), conference distributions aren’t very cyclical at all
I was only referring to the profit component. My theory is that the Big Ten is holding back that money to smooth the profit payments so there are no major jumps (either up or down) in any given year.
LikeLike
After years of denying, Bobby Bowden finally admitted what everyone already knew; that he told the administration that FSU should join the ACC instead of the SEC because it would be easier to win national titles.
I felt Paul that it was too difficult to win through the SEC to win a national championship. I felt like our best route would be to go through the ACC and that did prove out to be correct. But, I don’t know if we could have made it through the SEC.
LikeLike
frug,
“After years of denying, Bobby Bowden finally admitted what everyone already knew; that he told the administration that FSU should join the ACC instead of the SEC because it would be easier to win national titles.”
I thought he had admitted that before. What’s really important to that statement is proper historical context, though:
FSU joined the ACC in 1992 for football (joined the ACC in 1991). At that time, the ACC had 8 members and began playing 7 ACC games in 1983.
The SEC was a 10 team conference that started playing 7 conference games in 1988.
FSU played Miami and UF OOC each year in addition to their 8 ACC games. Spurrier had just started coaching UF when FSU decided on the ACC, so UF was not a power yet.
http://www.collegepollarchive.com/football/ap/total_points.cfm?from=1980&to=1989#.VVlxI5MeGYM
Based on total AP poll points, the relevant schools during the 80s were:
3. Miami
8. FSU
5. AU
6. AL
11. UGA
20. LSU
22. UF
28. TN
41. MS St
15. Clemson
25. UNC
38. UMD
42. NCSU
45. UVA
So yes, the SEC was a tougher path back then. But the SEC wasn’t what it was during the BCS era (6 top 20 teams in total AP points). And joining the SEC would’ve made the UF game a conference game, eliminating a tough OOC game for them. FSU had 10 locked games in an 11 game schedule once they joined the ACC.
LikeLike
Bowden had admitted that the ACC gave FSU an easier path to the national championship but he had always denied that he had any input in the decision.
LikeLike
Another comparison is national championships.
1980s:
UGA
Clemson
Miami x3
PSU x2
BYU
ND
OU
LikeLike
Eh, whatever. Florida State may have had a weaker conference schedule during their 90’s dominance, but they had a winning record versus Spurrier’s vaunted Fun-n-Gun teams, played Miami annually, often played teams like USC, Texas A&M, and Notre Dame for their third non-conference game, beat Mack Brown’s UNC teams when they were 11-1 and 10-2, and also had some tough top-15 to top-5 ACC opponents like Georgia Tech, Virginia, and Clemson. The schedule was plenty comparable to the rigors of a typical SEC schedule (which was weak out of conference) at the time. The stellar bowl records, production of NFL talent, and dominance all point to the idea that FSU would have had similar records in the 90’s had they been in the SEC.
Would they have always won the SEC? Not always, but considering that they won against Florida more often than not, I’d venture to say they would have won the SEC at least as often as UF did in that era.
I guess it’s just too bad because Bowden just gave more fuel to the attitude that the SEC is some kind of NFL division, even though that attitude should be toned down after bowl losses by Bama, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State. Yes, it’s a great league. It’s just not nearly as phenomenal as it’s made out to be, nor are the Big Ten, ACC, Big 12, or Pac-12 nearly as far behind as so many writers and ESPN people say they are. NFL draft picks both in the first round and overall, as well as non-conference and bowl results, point to how close the other leagues are to the SEC.
LikeLike
I pointed out several of the same things. The SEC of the 80s was not a juggernaut like the BCS SEC was. It was just another major conference. The independents were some of the best teams in the 80s (Miami, FSU, PSU, etc). That’s how the world stood when FSU chose the ACC. The SEC improved in the 90s, but didn’t become dominant until about 2007.
Especially with Miami and UF OOC every year, I agree FSU’s schedule in the ACC wasn’t much (if any) easier than if they were in the SEC (UF would be replaced by a cupcake OOC must likely). FSU had so much talent in Bowden’s big run that they would’ve been fine anywhere.
LikeLike
Wow Frank. You’re making me feel really old. You’re much younger than me and already facing generation gaps. Although you are probably too young to actually remember the Coke ad when it first aired.
I was thinking the other day how younger people couldn’t understand the euphoria when the Berlin Wall fell. People like me had fallout drills in addition to fire drills in elementary school. Many people expected a nuclear war with mass casualties. There was lots of talk about whether it would exterminate all life on earth. Random thought-That 70s show episode with their rock, paper scissors game-foot, nuclear bomb, cockroach. Cockroach beats the nuclear bomb.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/119225/big-ten-spring-meetings-preview
B10 meetings preview.
In addition to discussing freshmen ineligibility:
Burke said athletic directors have asked the Big Ten to come up with conference schedules for the next decade into the future so that schools can plan their nonconference games. Currently, the league is scheduled out only until 2019. The nine-game Big Ten schedule begins in 2016, and the league remains committed to adding an extra conference contest, so there are not many slots in which to affix those three yearly nonconference matchups.
Looks like scheduling way in advance will continue.
LikeLike
I will be very surprised if they release any future schedules before the new TV contract is announced.
LikeLike
Unless they think releasing a couple more to demonstrate something the networks want to see (more September games, more of the parity-based games, whatever) will help the negotiations.
LikeLike
We’re probably around a year out from the announcement of the new deal. ESPN, FOX, NBC, CBS, and Turner will all inevitably want something different Why do something now when you can make scheduling part of the talks and give the highest bidder exactly what they want?
LikeLike
Funny that I recently read where ADs were complaining about non-conference games being scheduled so far out now want league locked in which enables scheduling further out.
LikeLike
What conceivably are you going to do scheduling wise to raise bidding though? The only thing the Big Ten can do at this point is ease the November night game restrictions and they’ve already shown that they are willing to do that.
The counterpoint to your argument is that if you set schedules further out you are showing prospective bidders on the next contract what they’re actually going to get, presumably enhancing the value of their bidding. Honestly I don’t think this matters significantly to the television contract either way. As such they’re probably better off setting the schedule to give schools a better idea for non-conference scheduling.
LikeLike
Nostradamus,
“What conceivably are you going to do scheduling wise to raise bidding though? The only thing the Big Ten can do at this point is ease the November night game restrictions and they’ve already shown that they are willing to do that.”
I mentioned a couple of things:
1. More September conference games means lower odds of having a weekend full of crappy games to choose from.
2. Showing the increased number of brand vs brand games in the schedule due to parity-based scheduling.
The B10 doesn’t have November night game restrictions, the schools do.
“The counterpoint to your argument is that if you set schedules further out you are showing prospective bidders on the next contract what they’re actually going to get, presumably enhancing the value of their bidding.”
Well, the OOC games are always a wildcard for the bidders. That’s why the B10 added the avoidance of I-AA foes.
“Honestly I don’t think this matters significantly to the television contract either way.”
Probably not. I was just tossing it out as a counterpoint to the idea that waiting is automatically better for the TV deal.
“As such they’re probably better off setting the schedule to give schools a better idea for non-conference scheduling.”
Especially since they are adding September B10 games. You wouldn’t need early schedules if the schools knew which weekends were available for OOC games.
LikeLike
Brian, I agree on your 1 and 2 but you can go to those with setting a firm schedule or not at this point. If you think those conceivably raise the value of the 2017 rights you do it regardless i.e. you either set the schedules right now or you tell the networks bidding that you are willing to do it when they are submitting their bids. I was more responding to Mike’s contention that their is something to be gained in negotiations by not releasing future schedules. If anything, I think it is a hindrance.
As for the November night games at this point the schools and the conference are one in the same on that. We have several this year… Honestly though, if they’re willing to commit to night games in November as a conference that is probably one area where they can add value.
LikeLike
I don’t know that the new tv contract really impacts scheduling.
LikeLike
?
Games scheduled is what TV will be biding on, or what they hope will be scheduled. Sometimes the unknown has more potential/value than the known, unless the known are obvious valuable match ups.
LikeLike
I’d argue they’re bidding on anticipated ratings more than anything. Ratings are what sets advertising rates and thus what impacts probability and ultimately what a network is willing to bid for the rights. With the divisions set the networks already know 50% of the Big Ten’s schedules. I mean we now 2/3’s of Nebraska’s schedule for 2023 (year 6 of the new deal)…
With so many games already being set, the Big Ten being bid on in the middle of practically no other major sports rights being available, etc; all I’m saying is them releasing definitive schedules or not isn’t going to materially impact the value of what ESPN or Fox or Comcast or Turner is going to bid.
LikeLike
should’ve read impacts network revenue (or anticipated profitability)
LikeLike
Flexibility on non-Saturday games and as Brian mentioned above, having more conference games in September can influence value.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25188743/reinstate-uab-football-new-study-shows-both-options-are-viable
UAB report says school could go either way on football.
Reinstating football, bowling and rifle at the University of Alabama at Birmingham or keeping them cut are both “viable” options, but reviving the sports could create a “unique opportunity” to capitalize off the interest, according to a new study commissioned by UAB.
…
Ultimately, though, the decision rests with UAB president Ray Watts, who has said he will announce whether the teams are reinstated by June 1.
…
Conference USA leaders meet June 8 to formally vote on the future of UAB, which has spent five months mired in local blowback over the decision. C-USA has communicated to UAB that it won’t keep the Blazers unless they change their decision last December to kill football. C-USA bylaws require members to play football.
CSS, which interviewed dozens of UAB employees and had access to school financial records, said there was a “flawed assumption” that UAB could stay in C-USA without football. That was evident in the first study by CarrSports Consulting — a document heavily used by UAB last December to justify killing football — since it had no financial model without C-USA revenue.
“Consequently, it appears there were no definitive discussions with other conferences regarding possible membership” prior to the Dec. 2 announcement to end football, CSS wrote.
Reinstating or killign the sports “are viable in very different ways,” the CSS study said. “The real questions become what does UAB want to be in intercollegiate athletics, in whose company does it want to stand, and what is the best fit to match the mission and vision of the University?
LikeLike
That whole UAB thing is so bizarre, with U of Alabama supporters carrying so much influence over a completely separate institution.
It doesn’t seem to work that way in North Carolina. Technically, all of the public universities are part of one University of North Carolina system. Those include the schools with “UNC” in the name–UNC-Greensboro, UNC-Charlotte, UNC-Wilmington, UNC-Asheville, UNC-Pembroke, and, of course, UNC-Chapel Hill–just as much as NC State, East Carolina, App State, etc.
UNC Chapel Hill has nothing to do with the athletic departments at the other schools whatsoever. They certainly are in no way threatened by them. Now, they are able to command far more state funding for expensive research than the other schools–the differences between the support for UNC-CH and the four state HBCU’s are astounding–but the athletic departments are a separate issue entirely.
That said, what an utter mess UAB has made for itself. How could they not take into account the effect dropping football would have on conference affiliation and income? Wow.
LikeLike
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/05/strong_indications_uab_will_no.html
State Rep. Jack Williams told AL.com Thursday morning he’s received “strong indications” that UAB President Ray Watts has decided not to reinstate the school’s football program and plans to announce that news Friday night.
“This could lead to irreparable damage at UAB in its relationship with the community,” Williams said.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/05/18/nebraska-to-open-2017-football-season-against-arkansas-st/27527197/
NE will open 2017 against AR State (plus NIU and @ OR).
That’s got to make at least 1 person here happy. AR State also has USC, AU, Miami coming up. Are they looking to move up from the Sun Belt to CUSA?
LikeLike
Money game announcements rarely do much for me but $1.6 or $1.65 million gets my attention.
Nebraska gets better end. They play Oregon the next week and our offense (assuming no coaching change) is similar. We host Miami (FL) the next week not sure it helps much prepping us.
LikeLike
There’s always the chance you win. You’ve dominated the SB lately.
LikeLike
Gotta think you can win to have a shot.
LikeLike
They didn’t dominate App State. 😉
LikeLike
College Baseball Update (5/19).
The regular season is over and on the the conference tournaments.
LSU remains the #1 team in the land according to all the polls/rankings. The same teams are in the top five in all the polls/rankings, but other than LSU, in some differing order. The top five include LSU (#1 in all polls), TCU (#2 in two polls), Illinois (#2 in two polls), UCLA (#2 in two polls), and Louisville.
Baseball America released its NCAA Tournament predictions today.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/college/projected-field-64-may-19/
According to BA, the top eight national seeds will be #1 LSU, #2 UCLA, #3 Louisville, #4 Illinois, #5 TCU, #6 Texas A&M, #7 Florida, and #8 Miami.
BA projections by P-5 conference:
ACC – 8
SEC – 7
Pac-12 and B1G – 5
B-12 – 2
Regarding attendance, LSU once again leads the nation, averaging a home crowd of 10,726.
#2 Ole Miss 8,028
#3 Arkansas 7,928
#4 Miss State 7,448
#5 South Carolina 7,354.
Top non-SEC school attendance by conference:
#6 Texas (5,517)
#8 Florida State (4,348)
#10 Louisiana-Lafayette (3,908)
#11 Nebraska (3,903)
LikeLike
BA projections by P-5 conference:
ACC – 8
SEC – 7
Pac-12 and B1G – 5
B-12 – 2
Amazing how fast B1G baseball has improved. It was only, what, 3 or 4 years ago that it was basically a mid-major when it comes to baseball, right? Didn’t the B1G usually only get 1-2 bids per year?
Is there any insight behind why the improvements have happened? Have new, better coaches been hired? Is the exposure on the BTN playing a big factor towards better recruiting? Has the huge influx of BTN dollars led to vastly improved, attractive facilities?
More power to the Big Ten and all, but I do hope that some of the leagues which are otherwise low- to mid-major in pretty much all the other sports can continue to be competitive nationally in baseball. The SoCon, Big West, and C-USA historically have produced programs which could go toe-to-toe with the richer leagues, and it’ll really be too bad if the funding gap becomes so great that they can no longer compete even in baseball.
LikeLike
Note: #11-Nebraska. A northern school.
LikeLike
Is there any insight behind why the improvements have happened? Have new, better coaches been hired? Is the exposure on the BTN playing a big factor towards better recruiting? Has the huge influx of BTN dollars led to vastly improved, attractive facilities?
Basically more investment by the schools. IMHO – BTN coverage for baseball has been disappointing.
LikeLike
More here:
The season before NU joined the Big Ten, 2011, the conference produced one regional team. The RPI, a ratings system that fuels postseason selections, ranked the league as the nation’s 16th best that year. Only one of its teams, Michigan State, finished inside the RPI top 100.
Erstad wanted the league to collectively schedule tougher, which it has since Nebraska arrived. He helped spearhead a softening of over-signing rules (Big Ten teams can now offer two extra scholarships to as many players as needed as protection against losing players lost to the pro draft). He’d hoped for more active and aggressive recruiting — and now, he said, league coaches “are everywhere.”
But the Big Ten had been positioning itself for a surge before Nebraska came on board.
In the 2007-08 academic year, the conference’s 10 baseball programs averaged about $1.01 million in expenses, according to figures reported to the U.S. Department of Education. Four teams spent more than $1 million. Nebraska was at $1.75 million that season.
Then the Big Ten Network took off. Athletic departments soon had bigger budgets, electing to invest more into baseball. Facilities were upgraded. New ballparks were built. Coaches earned raises.
Those 10 teams spent an average of $1.79 million in 2013-14. Four of them went over $2 million. Nebraska wasn’t even the biggest spender, ranked third behind Minnesota and Indiana at $2.16 million.
“I love the commitment to it,” Erstad said. “I love the energy of all the coaches. They are out there. That’s what we want.”
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/though-huskers-fell-to-eighth-seed-darin-erstad-is-a/article_ad828451-0be4-5c1a-be0e-3b989b29d174.html
LikeLike
Frank,
Your alma mater needs to fire the current AD, head football coach and women’s basketball coach now. Although they are allegations for now, once these stories are verified, I can see no other outcome. Rumors are typically worse than the allegation, but in this case, the reverse is true. I can not believe some of the things that are being shared by parents of current student athletes there.
What is going on at U of I? How did things get so bad so fast?
LikeLike
On the other hand, there is a place for due process. The allegations/rumors sound awful, and may very well be proven accurate. We cannot forget the Duke lacrosse case, though. 60 Minutes had a great piece several weeks back of Duke’s former lacrosse coach who was scapegoated by the administration and essentially blacklisted from the college lacrosse community for several years, even though he did absolutely, positively nothing wrong. He now works for Bryant University, a small Rhode Island school which just recently moved up to D1.
Moreover, the players, who were guilty only of throwing a fraternity-style party with underage drinking and for having a few strippers come to it, permanently will have their names show up in google searches alongside the word “rape.”
Illinois is suffering a huge P.R. hit. The accused may be guilty and absolutely should be fired if there are legitimate grounds for it, but due process needs to carry the day.
LikeLike
Michael,
I know three sets of parents personally. I have known the husbands since we were 10 years old. I helped raise these kids because we believe it takes a village. I had to talk one parent down from making a trip to Urbana… These aren’t the type of kids or parents to make things up. The situation down there is bad, real bad. UofI is doing a great job of keeping a lid on information.
The sad thing is, we all loved UofI growing up. So the goes waaay beyond just PR, but I hear you.
LikeLike
http://thegazette.com/subject/sports/are-trophy-runs-an-endangered-species-in-the-big-ten-20150520
Article on a possible push in the B1G to reduce the “trophy runs” in trophy games.
But, to me, the most interesting part of the article are Alvarez’s quotes about Gary Anderson. Signs of their rumored personality conflicts?
“If I remember correctly, Gary made that decision,” Wisconsin athletics director Barry Alvarez, also the Badgers former head coach, said Wednesday. “I’ve always felt part of the tradition was to run across the field, the other team knew it and made their way out of there and then the winning team celebrates with the Axe. But Gary made that decision without talking to me and it was because of the incident the we had the year before.”
LikeLike
Not being able to handle that is a negative comment on the maturity of the student-athletes and the management by the coaches. With former coach Pellini and current coach Franklin, you can understand why the Big 10 would be concerned about player behavior.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/12920648/big-ten-commissioner-jim-delany-table-freshman-ineligibility-discussion
Delany is backing down from freshmen ineligibility. He says it served it’s purpose as a starting point for conversations.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/119307/reducing-time-demands-a-key-focus-of-b1g-meetings
But the B10 will continue to study ways to reduce the time demands on student-athletes, including potentially mandating time off for much of the summer.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25190679/barry-alvarez-co-champions-impacted-big-12-in-playoff-last-year
Barry Alvarez says having co-champs hurt the B12 last year.
When asked at the Big Ten spring meetings whether having co-champions impacted the Big 12, Alvarez replied, “One of our main criteria is conference championship. You can’t give two teams in a conference the conference championship. You can’t give two teams credit for that.”
Alvarez said the Big 12 “didn’t have a champion, they had co-champions.”
…
Until now, CFP committee members had publicly shied away from saying that no Big 12 tiebreaker impacted the committee’s decision in picking eventual national champion Ohio State. Alvarez didn’t say Big 12 co-champions was the only factor, but suggested it was an important one.
Winning a conference is “one of the first (criteria) that’s mentioned,” Alvarez said. “So if you don’t have a conference champion, obviously that doesn’t bode well for you. You have to have a conference champion. If you’re not a conference champion, that hurts you in the evaluation, much like strength of schedule.”
LikeLike
So he’s saying the committee ignored the Big 12’s definition of champion and decided neither was?
LikeLike
No, he said champion is singular. Co-champion is a different word with a different definition.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25189377/lsu-ad-on-texas-am-game-we-will-not-play-in-tiger-stadium-on-a-thursday
LSU’s AD says they won’t host a game on a Thursday night, so the TAMU game T-day weekend will be on Saturday. TAMU moved it to T-Day last year to replace their traditional game versus Texas.
Alleva did say Friday was a possibility, though.
Last season, the Aggies hosted LSU in a 23-17 loss on that Thursday night — the slot previously dedicated to their annual rivalry game against Texas. While Texas A&M may continue that tradition at home with the Tigers, Alleva said there is no chance the game gets moved from Saturday to Thursday under his watch.
“As long as I’m here, we will not play in Tiger Stadium on a Thursday,” Alleva said. “I guarantee you that.”
It is possible, according The Advocate, that the game gets moved to the Friday after Thanksgiving, a spot on the calendar where LSU has frequently played Arkansas in the past.
With the SEC Spring Meetings coming up in Destin, Florida, later this month and some scheduling issues still to be resolved, Alleva told The Advocate that his “No. 1 priority is night games in Tiger Stadium.”
The Advocate also reports that there are preliminary talks between LSU and Maryland for a future home-and-home series “probably in the next decade.”
LikeLike
Brian – playing on Thanksgiving is A&M’s tradition, not LSU’s. Under the SEC’s TV contracts, schools don’t have any choice about moving a game to the CBS Black Friday slot, but they do have a choice with regard to Thursday games, including Thanksgiving. To placate A&M, LSU has agreed to play on Thanksgiving night at College Station. If Alleva ever agreed to voluntarily move a game from a Saturday night, he would be run out of town. Night football games have been the norm at LSU since 1931. Football at night is the single MOST important tradition for LSU – even more important than wearing white jersies at home.
Since LSU doesn’t have an in-state rivalry game to end the season, my Tigers have been tasked with the responsibility of breaking in the new guys over the last two expansions. The SEC forced the Arkansas rivalry on us in the 90s. While it made geographic sense and there was some history between the schools, Arkansas always hated LSU way more than LSU hated Arkansas. The A&M rivalry is a little more natural. The John Chavis lawsuits are just adding gas to the fire.
With all that being said, LSU has been a good SEC soldier throughout the last two expansions and losing out on the permanment cross-division games issue. Last year, the SEC did throw a bone to LSU on the priority of night home games. None of the ESPN networks will show an LSU home game during the day. If there are two close games, CBS will pick the other game so LSU can play at night on ESPN. If the LSU home game is obviously the best game of the week, then the Tigers have to suck it up and play on CBS in the afternoon. This is only a handshake deal.
Regarding LSU v. Maryland scheduling a home and home . . . I would love it! Maryland is my ancestoral home and the Orioles are my favorite MLB team. The Terps may consider moving their game to FEDEX or M&T, because LSU would bring a lot of folks.
What’s the B1G requirement for visitors’ ticket allotment?
LikeLike
What’s the B1G requirement for visitors’ ticket allotment?
IIRC 3,000 is the rule, but everyone but Wisconsin and Minnesota agreed to 4,000.
LikeLike
Alan from Baton Rouge,
“Brian – playing on Thanksgiving is A&M’s tradition, not LSU’s.”
I know. I thought that was clear from the quote. I don’t blame LSU for not wanting to play on Thanksgiving. I wouldn’t want OSU to do it. I like to see an AD stick up for his school even if the networks want to do something.
“Under the SEC’s TV contracts, schools don’t have any choice about moving a game to the CBS Black Friday slot,”
I didn’t know that, but I guess it makes some sense.
“Since LSU doesn’t have an in-state rivalry game to end the season, my Tigers have been tasked with the responsibility of breaking in the new guys over the last two expansions. The SEC forced the Arkansas rivalry on us in the 90s. While it made geographic sense and there was some history between the schools, Arkansas always hated LSU way more than LSU hated Arkansas. The A&M rivalry is a little more natural. The John Chavis lawsuits are just adding gas to the fire.”
Yeah, they aren’t ideal for LSU but it could’ve been worse. At least the rivals are close to home so LSU fans can drive to the road games. It’s not like the AR/SC locked rivalry.
“With all that being said, LSU has been a good SEC soldier throughout the last two expansions and losing out on the permanment cross-division games issue.”
I’m amazed how little traction the complaints about LSU/UF have gotten over the years, frankly.
“Regarding LSU v. Maryland scheduling a home and home . . . I would love it! Maryland is my ancestoral home and the Orioles are my favorite MLB team. The Terps may consider moving their game to FEDEX or M&T, because LSU would bring a lot of folks.
What’s the B1G requirement for visitors’ ticket allotment?”
Smaller than the SEC’s, I’m sure. It’s only 3000 for B10 games, but only WI and MN tend to be strict about that (maybe RU and UMD, too, I don’t know). Most B10 schools agree to do 4000. I think OOC games are based on the individual contract.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/05/19/notre-dame-northwestern-knight-commission-nlrb-labor-unions/27598219/
Jack Swarbrick and NW’s former president say that if the NLRB decides that athletes are employees, their schools will withdraw from big-time college sports.
Notre Dame’s athletic director and Northwestern’s president emeritus said Tuesday that if college athletes ultimately are ruled to be employees of their respective schools, they foresee their universities withdrawing from the current setup of big-time sports.
…
“Notre Dame’s just not prepared to participate in any model where the athlete isn’t a student first and foremost — that’s the hallmark for us,” Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick told USA TODAY Sports after a Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics meeting here during which he appeared as a panelist. “If the entire model were to move toward athletes as employees, we’d head in a different direction. Our president has been clear about that. I’m not articulating a unique position.”
Northwestern president emeritus Henry Bienen, a member of the Knight Commission, indicated during the meeting that he hopes Northwestern will leave the current form of big-time college sports if athletes are determined to be employees. … Afterward, in remarks he prefaced by saying he does not speak for the university, Bienen elaborated.
“If tomorrow you waved a magic wand and all football players and basketball players were unionized, and privates were paying them, that’s not where the universities would be — or should be, in my mind,” he said.
This is “not hooked to the NLRB case, per se,” he said. “That’s the opening salvo. But there’s a lot of other things floating around. … If we wound up with a business where you wound up paying the players to play, I think alumni would have a different view (of college sports). I think the faculty would be unaccepting of it, at least at universities like Northwestern and Stanford and maybe Notre Dame, Rice, Duke. … We haven’t gotten there by a long shot. Will we? I don’t know. I hope not.”
Swarbrick’s and Bienen’s comments parallel those Stanford AD Bernard Muir made to USA TODAY Sports last May after appearing before a Congressional hearing on the Northwestern unionization effort. “If (Stanford’s athletes) are deemed employees, we will opt for a different model,” Muir said at the time.
I’d love to see some of these schools stick to their guns and do it.
If so, it opens up all new expansion debates, too:
P12 – Do Stanford and USC both drop out? If so, do you stay at 10 and play a round robin?
B10 – Do you replace NW or stay at 13 (don’t need divisions anymore)? Who would make sense as the new #14?
SEC – Is Vandy gone? If so, do they replace them or stay at 13?
B12 – TCU and Baylor are private. What TX schools can replace them? SMU and Rice are also private. Does UH get the nod? Who else?
ACC – ND money is gone. BC, SU, Duke, WF and Miami are all private. SU and Miami seem less likely to drop out, but that still leaves 3 holes. Does UConn get the call to replace Duke hoops? That would leave them at 12.
LikeLike
I’d suggest the B10 stay at 13, personally. Scrap divisions and just lock some rivalries.
8 games = 4 locked + 8 teams 50%
9 games = 4 locked + 8 teams 63%
If they wanted to go to 14, they’re stuck. ACC and B12 teams are locked into GORs. I don’t believe MO would be willing to leave the SEC. That pretty much leaves AAC teams (UConn). I think staying at 13 for now would be a wiser choice.
LikeLike
No. You follow the lead and hopefully most/all of the B1G and P12 go with NW, Stanford, etc. My interest is in the schools and conferences, and not in maximizing espn’s revenue. The B1G, PAC, some of the ACC, ND, Rice, the Ivy’s, maybe Vandy , perhaps UT, and whoever else would commit to a non pro system would be enough to make a viable true student athlete experience. Let the rest become the minor league for the NFL.
LikeLike
I would hope very much they wouldn’t got that way. If there is ruling that athletes are effectively employees and needed to be treated as such (although I doubt you’d ever get that 100%, more likely would be something more blended half student/half employee), then the reasons for that will be the tremendous income they bring to the school (directly and indirectly).
If the schools wanted to change enough so that they no longer would fall under the ruling, it would mean a severe reduction in income meaning at least several of the following: a) no huge TV contracts, b) no donations for ticket prices, c) no huge prices for tickets, d) no multi-million dollar coaches. Abandoning enough to get out of the court ruling could mean you will rarely see your team on TV no matter how big they are.
LikeLike
If they turn into true employees, I wouldn’t be interested in seeing them. There’s no point in the school having a team.
LikeLike
Eric – add to your list e) no elite players.
LikeLike
Alan:
Perhaps fewer, but not none. Not every elite player chooses a school because of immediate financial reward. Some (Mariota, Luck, etc) forgoe immediate enormous financial reward for another year in school. And as bullet says my interest is not in what mercenaries the school can hire. The actual big money isn’t in the athletic dept. It’s in the loyalty of it’s alumnae and regional fans. TV shows poker, and little league. They will continue to show college FB, as they do now even though the elite players are in the NFL, as long as there is an audience. Professionalizing has the risk of compromising that loyalty.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“No. You follow the lead and hopefully most/all of the B1G and P12 go with NW, Stanford, etc.”
You know I’d love to see that, but deep down I know it’s a pipe dream (and so do you).
“My interest is in the schools and conferences, and not in maximizing espn’s revenue. The B1G, PAC, some of the ACC, ND, Rice, the Ivy’s, maybe Vandy , perhaps UT, and whoever else would commit to a non pro system would be enough to make a viable true student athlete experience. Let the rest become the minor league for the NFL.”
On the surface it sounds plausible. But as the TV money and donations start to drop, the house of cards that is the AD funding system collapses. All of a sudden OSU is cutting 20 sports and reducing the support for the remaining ones. The debt can’t be serviced, the school has to support athletics instead of the other way around, the faculty rebel and everything falls apart.
LikeLike
“You know I’d love to see that, but deep down I know it’s a pipe dream (and so do you).”
I’m more sure that the necessity of the choice will be avoided. If forced into becoming NFL lite I think a surprising number would chose an alternative.
“But as the TV money and donations start to drop…”
Would TV ignore huge fan bases and regional rivalries, just because they aren’t being compensated like others? If they can sell ads it’ll be on.
Donations are likely to drop as a result of professionalizing. When is the last time you heard of some individual (non owner) donating facilities, or endowing coaches pay, or player salary (scholarships) in the NFL/NBA?
“All of a sudden OSU is cutting 20 sports and reducing the support for the remaining ones.”
OSU didn’t just add those 20 sports since TV income began to boom. Circumstances will change for coaches pay and the facilities arms race, but the offerings can continue. And that’s assuming there is a drop in income. Do you think fans will prefer to watch, follow, support NFL lite and ignore the historic college teams/conferences (assuming the teams/conferences I listed earlier)?
LikeLike
The billion dollar question is this.
If football playing is employment is it still an educational opportunity. If it is not an educational opportunity it is no longer a Title IX concern.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“If forced into becoming NFL lite I think a surprising number would chose an alternative.”
I’m sure they’d like to, I just don’t think they can. They are financially committed.
“Would TV ignore huge fan bases and regional rivalries, just because they aren’t being compensated like others? If they can sell ads it’ll be on.”
The fan bases will shrink a lot if there are pros at other colleges.
“Donations are likely to drop as a result of professionalizing. When is the last time you heard of some individual (non owner) donating facilities, or endowing coaches pay, or player salary (scholarships) in the NFL/NBA?”
They’ll also drop as the teams stop being competitive for national titles. Just look at the difference in donations between the kings and the lesser P5 teams now.
“OSU didn’t just add those 20 sports since TV income began to boom.”
No, but they’ve added a bunch of financial commitments since then. They can’t go back and spend as little as they used to on those sports. Just the FCOA will see to that. They still have to pay off the debt for all these new facilities, too.
“Do you think fans will prefer to watch, follow, support NFL lite and ignore the historic college teams/conferences (assuming the teams/conferences I listed earlier)?”
Yes, many of them will unfortunately. OSU has millions of fans but only about 500,000 living alumni. Millions of those fans prefer the NFL already and would happily add allegiance to AL if the SEC paid players and the B10 didn’t. The worse your players, the less attention the team will get.
LikeLike
“The worse your players, the less attention the team will get.”
Naw. ND managed just fine through their putrid time. Even managed to be ranked some of the time.
LikeLike
“The fan bases will shrink a lot if there are pros at other colleges.”
“They’ll also drop as the teams stop being competitive for national titles.”
I highly doubt they will be playing the pro teams. One group will be playing for the college title, and the for the pro minor league title.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“Naw. ND managed just fine through their putrid time. Even managed to be ranked some of the time.”
That’s because they had a ton of talent still. That wouldn’t be the case if the SEC, ACC and B12 are paying players.
“I highly doubt they will be playing the pro teams. One group will be playing for the college title, and the for the pro minor league title.”
Actually, I think the pros would still claim to be college teams and thus playing for the CFP title just like now. The amateurs would basically become I-AA.
LikeLike
It won’t be like FBS vs FCS it will be like AAU basketball vs ABA 2000. Completely different entities.
Let’s say 60 schools choose employees the remaining 1000+ aren’t allowing them to hang around and will not play (at least the more financially independent will not).
If you look at fan maps support is highly geographic. If Big Ten and Pac-12 reject the employee model so will the MAC and quite possibly MWC. The WCC and Big West will follow the Pac-12 lead.
Frankly I doubt many if any take the employee model. Universities are highly peer oriented.
LikeLike
Arkstfan,
“It won’t be like FBS vs FCS it will be like AAU basketball vs ABA 2000. Completely different entities.”
I don’t think that matters. It’ll be 2 sets of college-affiliated teams and both sets will claim to play for the college national title. Much like NIT vs NCAA, over time the newer entity will win out as the paid players will be more talented on average.
“Let’s say 60 schools choose employees the remaining 1000+ aren’t allowing them to hang around and will not play (at least the more financially independent will not).”
The NCAA may cut them off, but they’ll still be college teams. That’s all I was saying.
“Frankly I doubt many if any take the employee model. Universities are highly peer oriented.”
There is a 0.1% chance Alabama and schools like it drop to a lower level rather than pay players.
LikeLike
“Much like NIT vs NCAA, over time the newer entity will win out as the paid players will be more talented on average.”
It’d be the reverse. NCAA swallowed the NIT by enlarging and starving it of decent teams. It became more inclusive (and lucrative). NIT probably is a close second fiddle if NCAA stayed 16-24 entrants.
How do kings/princes remain such in spite of significant down periods? Or how do any middle to bottom tier schools retain any fan base and following?
LikeLike
There is also 0.01% probability that the state of Alabama will consider student athletes employees. NLRB rulings do not apply to state or other public employees. Very few if any public schools will be able to convert to an employer based athletic program since they lose money on athletics. With athletic salaries and the actions (arrests, etc.) subject to state legislature oversight any program running a deficit would subject the university to a loss of state funding. The P5 conferences can just make it a requirement of membership that schools not hire athletics for conference play. The SEC vote is probably 13-1 on this. That way any school that starts to pay athletes will have violated conference bylaws and effectively resigned. It will be hard to get a semi-pro college league off the ground, especially if P5 conferences do not allow pro teams. Even if a state would allow athletes as public employees, those laws are likely to get changed if that is required to keep a big state school from being booted from a P5 conference. Alabama, Michigan, OSU, etc. alums are not going to switch their support to a new semi-pro team.
LikeLike
And good luck unionizing Bama players.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“It’d be the reverse.”
I wasn’t saying it would happen for the same reasons, just that the formerly important thing would wither and die while the new thing took over.
LikeLike
Mack,
“There is also 0.01% probability that the state of Alabama will consider student athletes employees. NLRB rulings do not apply to state or other public employees.”
But if privates are ordered to pay them, then the NCAA has to decide what to do. If one group is paying players, schools like AL would demand the right to also pay players. The various lawsuits may force this on the NCAA anyway.
“Very few if any public schools will be able to convert to an employer based athletic program since they lose money on athletics.”
They lose money because they choose to lose money. It’s partially accounting games and partially unnecessary spending.
“With athletic salaries and the actions (arrests, etc.) subject to state legislature oversight any program running a deficit would subject the university to a loss of state funding.”
I highly doubt it.
“The P5 conferences can just make it a requirement of membership that schools not hire athletics for conference play.”
Only if the courts say they can. It would also mean forcing out long-term members.
“It will be hard to get a semi-pro college league off the ground, especially if P5 conferences do not allow pro teams.”
And not at all hard if the P5 decide to do it or the courts force it.
“Alabama, Michigan, OSU, etc. alums are not going to switch their support to a new semi-pro team.”
No, but tons of bandwagon fans will switch to the semi-pro college team of their choice in addition to the amateur college team they used to root for.
LikeLike
I don’t know if NWU is flat out lying about leaving big times sports, or just being hypocrites. The entire graduate school model (and resultant research dollars) is based on grad students being treated as both a student and an employee. On many campuses, they are organized into unions.
LikeLike
Has it ever been otherwise? Is there a governing body organizing competitions between grad student teams from multiple universities, defining what is allowed or not?
LikeLike
It’s not just the private schools. A lot of public schools will drop out, too. Even some big powers like Ohio State might drop out. The faculties at the big powers already look at athletics askance, and there would be a revolt at many schools if their programs went pro.
It might even be a good thing to shut down big time athletics. You wouldn’t have the scandal of academically unqualified and uninterested athletes cluttering up your campus. Of course that problem goes back over 100 years, which is why the B1G and NCAA exist in the first place.
LikeLike
I actually think it could be 50/50 staying and leaving in the other-than-Vandy SEC.
The employee-cum-NFL minor league model might work better in “financially perilous” public high FCS and G5 urban campuses (wait it out UAB?), where there are more peer students in vocational/remedial type instruction, and they may be more willing to take NFL development money (b/c the CFB TV money will shrink and what remains will resemble the scale of what we see with regard to softball and baseball on a spring weekend day, apart paid attendance and other more alumni-based/sourced broadcast platforms).
LikeLike
The Harvard/Yale game is probably a better model for the big time dropouts. Plenty of emotion and tradition. Of course, Harvard stadium only holds about 30,000+ as opposed to Ohio State and Michigan’s 110,000+. Yale’s stadium holds almost 65,000, although attendance is typically less than 20,000.
LikeLike
Plus they are both much richer and don’t have nearly the same amount of athletic debt to service.
LikeLike
Pac-12 full members got approximately $21 million for FY 2014 from the conference. That is in a similar range with the SEC, Big XII, and ACC and about $6 to 7 million behind the Big Ten.
LikeLike
More on the PAC12. Too much to quote.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25191844/is-pac-12-financially-about-to-fall-far-behind-big-ten-and-sec
LikeLike
The article mentions the series Jon Wilner did on the future of P12 finances. One thing Scott mentions is that Wilner’s estimates for the future of the P12N growth don’t match the P12’s projections (not that he would reveal what those projections are). Scott also mentioned that the P12 could gain $2M/school per year by managing their multimedia rights in-house.
He doesn’t mention that the other conferences are also getting paid for those rights, but on an individual level so it’s not in the conference payout numbers. It’s hardly like only the P12 can make money that way. Scott really seems big on promoting the P12 in China. I’m sure that’s great for the schools, but I’m not sure there’s a lot of rights money there.
LikeLike
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/05/21/pac-12-conference-fy14-revenues-expenses-and-per-school-distributions/#more-39958
Wilner’s breakdown of the info.
4) Comparisons to other major conferences.
All figures are for FY14. It’s important to compare apples to apples, even if the apples are 11 months old.
*** By total revenue
Pac-12: $374 million
Big 10: $339 million
SEC: $326 million
ACC: $292 million
Big 12: $226 million
*** By percentage of total revenue distributed to schools
Big Ten: 93.4%
SEC: 90.2%
Big 12: 87%
Pac-12: 67% (see below)
ACC: unknown
*** By per-school income
Big Ten: $27.5 (for continuing members)
Big 12: $23 million
Pac-12: $21 million (does not include Tier 3 withholdings of approx 750k)
SEC: $21 million
ACC: $21 million
LikeLike
We’ve pretty much cycled back to circa 2006-2007.
LikeLike
In apples to apples, its important to remember the Pac 12 owns its network, so it has more revenues, but also more expenses relative to the others. Also, the Big 12 and SEC schools owned their own Tier 3 media rights in the period covered by those “per-school income” charts.
LikeLike
“In apples to apples, its important to remember the Pac 12 owns its network, so it has more revenues, but also more expenses relative to the others.”
…and a 100% equity stake that doesn’t show in these reports. Longhorn net 0% UT stake. SECN 0% (as far as I recall). BTN 49% currently. B12 net nonexistent. ACC net nonexistent. Difficult to do apples to apples when some are oranges. And some are vegetables, not even fruit.
LikeLike
SECN’s setup hasn’t been officially disclosed. But the stories say they have a 50% stake in the profits. Given the nature of a conference network, that’s not really any different in value than a 50% equity stake. And Texas has a 70% interest in the profits after (and if) certain revenue targets are made. Neither has any risk of losing money.
LikeLike
There’s almost certainly some differences in what has been sold to the media, not just in the number of games. The ACC sold the naming rights to their basketball tournament. There are certainly some other differences on what has been retained and sold. So it is difficult to compare exactly. You can only look at generally.
LikeLike
Bullet:
“But the stories say they have a 50% stake in the profits.”
So, no equity stake, just a payment structure. (I think they may have some stake in the on school site improvements, and perhaps more that hasn’t been disclosed)
“Given the nature of a conference network, that’s not really any different in value than a 50% equity stake.”
It is absolutely different. Producers and retailers that buy and resell product don’t own each other as a result. They make and/or receive payments. If you’re focusing only on current income value you’re overlooking the future value.
What’s the market value for a conference network? What would it be in five or ten years? Fox was willing to bump its stake and extend its contract for partnering in the BTN after a relatively short time. What might the B1G require to extend at the end of the current agreement? Yes, you can always say there is a risk. But I submit that what espn is spending to take that risk on (and reduce potential competition) indicates it is very low.
And all this addresses only monetary issues – doesn’t speak to the “value” of not having the potential competing and divergent interest of a commercial entity partner. As an extreem example, say there is a pro/non pro split. Wouldn’t having your own network lessen the external pressure and enable the presidents/conference to make the choice they feel is best for their mission, and not necessarily best for Bristol?
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12922781/liberty-bowl-moving-january-2-season
The Liberty Bowl is moving to 1/2 this season. I thought part of the CFP was keeping the lesser bowls in December where they belong. I know 1/2 is a Saturday, but no minor bowls should be played once the CFP starts.
LikeLike
With the first iteration of the CFP seeing the Armed Forces, “Taxslayer”, Alamo, and Cactus on the 2nd, Birmingham on the 3rd and GoDaddy on the 4th … it doesn’t seem like there was any particular effort to have no bowls between the Semi-Finals and the NCG.
LikeLike
They moved all the important bowls up to 12/31 or 1/1. The CFP can’t stop the little bowls from being later, but I wish the presidents would.
LikeLike
Post NYD is fan and player friendly WHY would you want to get rid of it?
Players can be given all the time around finals off. Practice a few days then release them home for Christmas, come back post-Christmas to practice again.
Fans have more time to plan and don’t have to bow out of Christmas parties nor choose between football and an annual family gathering (wife’s family has big gathering 3d Saturday in December to ease working out everyone’s in-laws).
When AState played in the displaced by Katrina New Orleans Bowl three or four players received their diplomas in a hotel ballroom because it conflicted with graduation and we held some afternoon practices during finals.
Post Christmas you generally can’t release players home for Christmas because bowls require you to be on site 4-7 days ahead of the game.
If we actually care about the players we play MORE post NYD and fewer before NYE.
LikeLike
Arkstfan,
“Post NYD is fan and player friendly WHY would you want to get rid of it?”
Post-NYD is bad for fans (have to work) and players (have to get back to school). Late December is better for both groups, generally.
“Players can be given all the time around finals off. Practice a few days then release them home for Christmas, come back post-Christmas to practice again.”
Schools start back up as early as 1/4.
LikeLike
How many start the Spring (or “Winter”) Semester that early? In the MAC, its one out of 12 … two others have a Winter term between their full Fall and Summer semesters, but members of a FB team not taking any Winter term classes is less disruption from bowl season than interrupting exams week for Fall semester, which an early bowl must surely do.
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“How many start the Spring (or “Winter”) Semester that early?”
I’m not going to check all of them. Stanford does. It may only be schools on quarters.
But in years where NYD isn’t a Friday, semester schools start as early as 1/6. Is that significantly different?
“but members of a FB team not taking any Winter term classes is less disruption from bowl season than interrupting exams week for Fall semester, which an early bowl must surely do.”
Finals end just before the early bowls for semester schools. Quarters end a week earlier, generally.
LikeLike
“I’m not going to check all of them. Stanford does. It may only be schools on quarters.”
Yes, would have been a bigger factor when more schools were on quarters … one reason the MAC is only 1 in 12 (EMU) is because all the MAC schools are now semester schools.
“But in years where NYD isn’t a Friday, semester schools start as early as 1/6. Is that significantly different?”
If the schools start on Monday and the last “little bowl” was Sunday the night before, that’s less disruption of classwork than having a bowl game hot on the heels of finals week. There is, after all, not generally any work due in on Monday morning when classes start. If I was given a choice between a student athlete taking Money and Banking or Intro to Macro having his study for finals competing with watching film and having the student athlete miss a Monday morning class on the first day of school and have to have a tutor take them through the first lecture, I’d take the second without any hesitation.
LikeLike
And yet you act like those are the only options. Most December bowl games start well after finals have ended. It’s not like these bowls are choosing solely between 12/18 and 1/4.
And don’t forget, most athletes take more classes in the off season than they do during the season.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/119324/all-in-on-reform-big-ten-needs-others-to-join-its-fight-for-change
More on the B10’s push for reform.
League leaders don’t expect to pass — or even officially propose — freshmen ineligibility. Many of them don’t want it. What they want is to lead a national discussion on how to enhance the student-athlete experience.
“We don’t have the answer about exactly how to make sure that education, at least from the NCAA standpoint, is more primary than secondary. But we wanted to have that discussion,” Jim Delany said.
“It’s actually accomplished what we hoped to accomplish,” Iowa athletic director Gary Barta said. “It’s created a great national dialogue.”
…
Lingering in the air aside the wasted breath of reporters upon Delany’s quick exit, a bigger question hangs over these meetings that will ultimately define their relevance: For all the talk about the important of academics and the need to reduce the time demands on football and basketball players, what happens next?
Delany said the Big Ten is collecting input generated by its year-of-readiness discussion. The league plans to dissect the results and continue to push for meaningful change next January at the NCAA convention.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/82261/having-fun-with-acc-division-realignment
A look at ACC divisions.
Option 1
Atlantic (.591)
Boston College
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Miami
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
Coastal (.532)
Clemson
Duke
North Carolina
NC State
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest
Initially, I had Clemson in the same division as Florida State to preserve their growing rivalry. But for balance sake, it did not make any sense to keep them together.
…
Option 2
Atlantic (.560)
Boston College
Clemson
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Syracuse
Coastal (.564)
Duke
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Miami
North Carolina
NC State
Wake Forest
This was actually my first attempt at solving the divisional alignment riddle. There is more balance here, and nearly all rivalries would be preserved. But North Carolina-Virginia would go away, a game that has been played 119 times and means more to some old-time Hoos than Virginia Tech. I don’t think either school would be willing to give up that game. But if only one rivalry game can be preserved, I’d stick with Virginia-Virginia Tech.
LikeLike
Conferences expand first, figure out divisions later. It would be a lot easier if conferences could trade teams. 3 way trade-NCSU to SEC, Arkansas (or Missouri) to Big 12, WVU to ACC. Probably be a financial win for all 3 conferences.
LikeLike
Friday before a holiday weekend bad news dumps begin….
http://uncnews.unc.edu/2015/05/22/unc-chapel-hill-announces-receiving-ncaa-notice-of-allegations/
I wouldn’t be shocked to see UAB get bad news today.
LikeLike
Yesterday a big UAB booster met with the president and was optimistic, according to reports.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/05/22/army-navy-game-college-football-playoff-selection-date/27778623/
The Army-Navy game won’t move earlier to accommodate the CFP decision process.
“We have no intention of moving it. None,” Navy athletics director Chet Gladchuk told USA TODAY Sports. “It would show that we’ve realigned our priorities in a way that doesn’t complement our mission. We can’t do it. It’s something that’s that special.”
…
“If it means that we’ve got to sacrifice the opportunity to participate in the playoff system, then that’s something we’ll have to deal with,” Gladchuk said. “We’ll have to work on that.”
…
A potential solution, one palatable to Gladchuk and Niumatalolo, would be to provide a hypothetical with the final rankings. In a situation where Navy enters the Army game as the top-ranked non-major-conference champion — having concluded league play one week before — the committee could elect to place the Midshipmen in an access bowl with one caveat: that it defeat Army to end the regular season. The committee would also provide a backup access-bowl participant in case of a Navy defeat.
Frankly, I say leave them out. They’ve only played that extra week later since 2009. They need to get over themselves if they think the CFP should adapt to a 6 year tradition. It’s not like either team is ever likely to make the top 4 anyway. And Navy will have to give up the G5 spot if they won’t play earlier. Oh well.
LikeLike
Exactly I get that it is lucrative but only because they sought a waiver to play a regular season game after the season. Ratings started dropping when meaningful games moved to the first Saturday in December.
Pick your poison. Finish by the last day of the season and take less money but be eligible for playoff and access selection or go for cash in hand and forego playoff and access consideration.
LikeLike
Like schools/academys that are fully taxpayer funded and every student is on a full ride has financial concerns. Every facility is top rate in every sport. Any restriction is self imposed for PR, as is the game being played as a near stand alone nationally highlighted recruiting tool for the services.
LikeLike
Smoke screen.
We have a playing season framework and they asked and were given a waiver but that waiver has the potential to harm others.
Last year they narrowly defeated South Alabama to get eligible. Lose and Army determined if they go to a bowl. Poinsettia was going to name a back up. Lose and the backup has 10 days to prep.
Say AState splits USC and Mizzou and runs the rest of the table and Navy is rated just ahead and Army matters. AState is watching Army-Navy. If Navy wins AState may well be playing in New Orleans the next Saturday. If Army wins AState goes to access but SOMEONE has to play the next week in New Orleans.
LikeLike
Army and Navy have got it right. The rest of the academic world is screwed up.
LikeLike
I’m missing what noblity exists in a very new “tradition” that is simply a cash grab. Looks exactly like what everyone else is doing to me.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“Army and Navy have got it right. The rest of the academic world is screwed up.”
In general, I agree. My problem with this issue is that they are selfishly causing problems for other people. If they agree to be left out of the CFP and NY6 and tell the lesser bowls to make their decisions based on the first 11 games, then I have no problem with it. But expecting other teams to be left hanging until a week before their bowl game is unrealistic.
LikeLike
Agree with you. If Army/Navy want to make more money playing on that date and skip the playoffs, that’s their choice. Much like Southern/Grambling playing on Thanksgiving and skipping the FCS playoffs. But you can’t have it both ways.
I don’t think there’s anything particularly special about a 6 year tradition.
LikeLike
Seriously? You guys think the United States Military Academy and the United States Navel Academy are worried about the money?
LikeLike
I never mentioned money. I think they want the attention, and I’m fine with that. I just don’t think they should also expect the bowls and CFP to be held hostage by their decision to play after the season is supposed to be done.
LikeLike
I agree. But I wonder how the 100 senators and 435 congress members that are their constituency will feel about the possibility, however unlikely, of them being left out? Don’t like it, but provisional selection and alternatives isn’t much different than teams/fans not knowing which bowl to plan for until CCG’s and selections, or CFB playoff final being unknown ’til semis.
LikeLike
I’d expect the CFP to set no hard and fast rules and say they’ll deal with it when it happens since every season is so unique that there’s no point in making a written rule.
Then the rankings will magically keep Army and Navy out of the top G5 champion spot every year that it can. If either is in top 4 contention before the Army-Navy game, I expect the CFP to make contingency plans that one year with the academy getting a NY6 spot no matter what.
LikeLike
I reckon aside from a full mobilization, re-instate the draft war, we can count on the size of their offensive and defensive lines to keep Army out of the top 4, and as they are not a member of a Go5 conference, they cannot be selected as the best of Go5 champions NYE/NYD representative.
So realistically this is about a weak year for the other Go5 champions combined with a strong year for Navy in which they have just won the American Athletic Conference CCG. If they are close enough to the next best Go5 champion so that a loss to Army would knock them down, its straightforward enough to “just happen to be” more impressed by the last win of the next best Go5 champion and less impressed by Navy’s win and pick the other school first with Navy a close second. Then as the AAC’s conference champion, they can go to the bowl for the AAC’s conference champion independent of whether they beat Army as expected or suffer the upset defeat.
And if Navy is so far ahead of the other Go5 champions that they can wear a defeat at the hands of Army, the committee can go ahead and rank them ahead, without conditions.
LikeLike
If it isn’t about the money why did they break the first Saturday in December tradition?
LikeLike
Something far more valuable, like the national spot light?
LikeLike
What ccrider55 said … they did it for the same basic reason that the network wanted to schedule that game … in the space between the conference seasons ending and the bowl season beginning, they both knew that people would tune in to the game, because it is the FBS football that is on TV. The network does it for the money, the Academies do it for the national exposure.
LikeLike
And even if it WAS about money, what exactly is wrong with that, when almost every other college sports scheduling decision is for precisely the same reason? We are all participants and beneficiaries.
I remember when NCAA rules limited each CFB program to no more than five TV appearances in a two-year period. A couple of schools sued the NCAA, and won. Of course, they earned vastly more money by selling their own TV rights. If you’ve watched your favorite team on TV more than five times in the last two years, then you are a participant in a cash grab far more vast than shifting Army-Navy to a bit later in December.
The 12th regular-season game was added to make money. If you’ve ever watched the 12th game of the season, and enjoyed it, then congratualtions: you are participating in a cash grab.
This year, there are something like triple or quadruple the number of bowl games there were in the 1960s. They were all added to make money. If you have ever watched and enjoyed any of those games, then congratulations: you are participating in a cash grab.
I trust you get the idea.
LikeLike
Great use of snarkcasm but go back to the context of my reply. The discussion was applauding the nobility of the academies up holding their practically invented yesterday tradition. They are chasing bucks that’s a newsflash since it is normal but spare me the baloney that they are preserving tradition.
LikeLike
Arkstfan:
They aren’t chasing bucks. “If they were…” is dismissing a nonexistent concern.
They are trying to defend a tradition of playing a highly watched (because of who, not how good, they are. That had been seriously encroached on by meaningful , and additional games added to the season by CCG and match ups effecting the BCS, and even more now with the playoff. It isn’t a date specific, but is the opportunity to continue to play a highly watched game. Again, because of who they are and not how good they may be.
LikeLike
The NCAA announced the baseball regional sites. The field of 64 will be announced tomorrow.
SEC: LSU, A&M, Florida & Vandy
ACC: Miami, Louisville, Florida State
Big XII: TCU & OK State
Missouri Valley: Dallas Baptist & Missouri State
Big West: CSU Fullerton & UC Santa Barbara
B1G: Illinois
AAC: Houston
Pac-12: UCLA
UC Santa Barbara at Lake Elsinore over Oregon State and College of Charleston is a bit of a head scratcher.
LikeLike
Here’s D-1 Baseball’s final prediction on the field of 64.
http://www.d1baseball.com/analysis/field-of-64-projections-the-final-edition/
LikeLike
Here’s the tournament selections.
http://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/article/2015-05-25/di-baseball-committee-releases-field-64-teams-2015-tournament
Top 8 national seeds.
1. UCLA
2. LSU
3. Louisville
4. Florida
5. Miami
6. Illinois
7. TCU
8. Missouri State
“The ACC and SEC lead all conferences in the number of teams in the championship field with seven. The Pac-12 has six institutions, while the Big 10 had a league-record five selected.”
LikeLike
It looks like MI winning the B10 may have knocked MSU out of the field. OSU had a shot a month ago or so but then we fell apart. Good to see the Hawkeyes break a long drought to make the field.
LikeLike
According to the AP-the committee said:
Last 4 in-Maryland, South Florida, Oregon, Clemson
First 4 out-North Carolina, Missouri, Michigan St., Southern Miss.
LikeLike
Committee seemed to do a pretty good job of minimizing travel for most teams. Houston’s regional has Houston, Rice, Houston Baptist and Louisiana-Lafayette.
LikeLike
Of course if the tourney was today, they would have to travel by boat in Houston.
LikeLike
Maybe that shot by Harden at the end of the first half brought the rains down.
Too bad that was a tenth of a second too late. Never seen a full court shot made before in a game.
LikeLike
The WCWS is set with all top 8 national seeds advancing for only the second time in the history of the sport. One bracket is an all SEC affair with #1 Florida, #8 Tennessee, #4 Auburn & #5 LSU. The other bracket includes #2 Oregon, #7 UCLA, #3 Michigan & #6 Bama.
LikeLike
http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/26/media/charter-buys-time-warner-cable/
Charter is serious about buying TWC.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/05/26/ncaa-athletic-finances-revenue-expense-division-i/27971457/
By the NCAA’s benchmark for self-sufficiency, just 24 of 230 public schools in Division I stand on their own, up from 20 a year earlier, according to an analysis of the 2013-14 school year by USA TODAY Sports,
[snip]
The other 23 [include Oregon to make 24] schools meeting this standard are all from the Southeastern, Big Ten, Pac-12 and Big 12 conferences, including Texas, which led the nation in total operating expenses at $154.1 million and reported transferring another $9.7 million back to the university. Texas’ total operating revenue was second to Oregon’s at $161 million.
The Atlantic Coast Conference, the other member of the Power Five, did not have any schools meeting the NCAA benchmark, though North Carolina State came close, with a deficit of just more than $165,000. That means athletics departments at schools in conferences outside the Power Five all ran deficits — and four of the six largest are from schools in the C-USA, AAC and Mountain West.
Rutgers, which was then in the AAC but has since moved to the Big Ten, had 2013-14’s largest deficit at $36.3 million. The AAC’s Connecticut had the third-highest ($27.1 million), ODU the fourth-highest ($26.8 million) and Mountain West’s Air Force the sixth-highest ($25.8 million).
The deficits get smaller and the number of self-sufficient schools gets larger if viewed another way. Though athletics departments get money from student fees, university funds and government support, they also send money to their schools through payments for scholarships and facilities and through transfers like Texas’.
When those amounts are balanced, USA TODAY Sports found, all 50 of the public schools that were in a Power Five conference in 2013-14 were self-sufficient. But only three Bowl Subdivision schools outside the Power Five and two non-FBS schools were self-sufficient.
LikeLike
Full list here:
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
LikeLike
If you sort by lowest total subsidy:
1 (tied). OSU, PSU, NE, PU, TX, OU, LSU – $0
8. MI – $256k
9. IA – $684k
10. UK – $862k
11. MSU – $1.09M
26. IN – $3.01M
30. IL – $3.93M
59. MN – $7.01M
78. WI – $8.07M
7 of the top 11 isn’t bad.
LikeLike
Interesting that AState in 2013 received just over 57% of operating budget from the school and fees and spent more than $16 million
In 2014 spending increased to $20 million but subsidy fell to 52%
LikeLike
Bravo to the commonwealth of Virginia for capping subsidies to college athletics, although I’d advocate much lower subsidies than those adopted by them.
If an athletic department can’t generate at least half of its revenue, it ought to start cutting sports.
LikeLike
I agree that some state control is smart.
If you read the article, that cap varies by the type of school. For P5 schools, it’s 20% (VT and UVA are already well below that). For I-AA, it’s 70%. For D-I, it’s 78%. Both sides investigated the numbers and decided collectively that 55% was a fair value for G5 schools (ODU is the only one in VA). Considering things like Title IX, I think you have to allow for changing amounts based on the type of school. I think a per student cap in terms of subsidy might be the better approach, though. Otherwise students at small schools could face much higher fees than at big schools.
Does this give private schools a leg up in athletics in VA?
LikeLike
Here’s the low and high revenue schools for each conference.
ACC: High – Florida State ($104.8mm); Low – GA Tech ($68.5mm)
B-12: High – Texas ($161mm); Low – Iowa State ($68.2mm)
B1G: High – Michigan ($157.9mm); Low – Purdue ($71.3mm)
P-12: High – Oregon (196mm); Low – Wash State ($54.4mm)
SEC: High – Alabama ($153.2mm); Low – Miss State ($62.3mm)
LikeLike
Here’s the low and high subsidy schools for each conference:
ACC: High – Virginia (15.81%); Low – Clemson (5.85%)
B-12: High – OK State (6.38%); Low – Texas & Oklahoma (zero)
B1G: High – Minnesota (6.60%); Low – Ohio State, Penn State, Nebraska & Purdue (zero)
P-12: High – Oregon State (19.41%); Low – Oregon (1.10%)
SEC – High – South Carolina (5.71%); Low – LSU (zero)
Conference switchers: Louisville (8.75%); Maryland (24.68%); and Rutgers (47.41%)
LikeLike
Easy to see why Maryland and Rutgers wanted to move to the B1G with its revenue streams. That’s an especially massive burden for an athletic department to require that large a subsidy. Kudos to Mitch Daniels, president of Purdue University, the only “non-king” school to not subsidize athletics.
USA Today has had several informative stories in the wake of the finance report. One focused on the SEC and its discontents with the current system, including the B1G’s “satellite” camps in the south. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/sec/2015/05/26/football-nick-saban-mike-slive-hugh-freeze-satellite-camps-cost-of-attendance/27980501/
It also informed us that Larry Scott really earned his paycheck, as the Pac-12 is the nation’s leading moneymaker among collegiate athletics conferences.
Finally here is a link to a really good interview with Daniels on his rules for the athletic department: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/changing_lanes/2015/04/13/three_standards_for_genuine_student_athletes_.html
LikeLike
Mike R,
“Easy to see why Maryland and Rutgers wanted to move to the B1G with its revenue streams.”
Especially for RU. UMD will gain, but not nearly as much.
“Kudos to Mitch Daniels, president of Purdue University, the only “non-king” school to not subsidize athletics.”
The price is the complete lack of success across the board from PU athletics. Only RU has had less success in B10 competition this year.
“USA Today has had several informative stories in the wake of the finance report. One focused on the SEC and its discontents with the current system, including the B1G’s “satellite” camps in the south.”
Yes, the poor SEC needs a level playing field to compete. Strangely they don’t feel the same way when other P5 conferences are disadvantaged by a conference rule (oversigning, for example).
On satellite camps:
1. The SEC and ACC chose to ban their coaches from them, supposedly so they wouldn’t step on another coach’s turf.
2. They all recruit the same kids anyway, so I don’t see the point in protecting turf.
3. They could ban them from satellite camps in the conference footprint but still let them go elsewhere. That would protect turf but still give them more options.
4. Last year PSU only managed 2 kids from VA and 1 from NC, so I’m not sure the satellite camps actually gain anything for coaches from far away.
5. The kids benefit from these camps. Screw the coaches.
“It also informed us that Larry Scott really earned his paycheck, as the Pac-12 is the nation’s leading moneymaker among collegiate athletics conferences.”
It’s only because they own the P12N outright. It’s a big revenue boost but most of it goes back into expenses.
LikeLike
Georgia State has paired with Penn State for camps I’d bet Georgia State gains more by getting kids to attend who either don’t have brand awareness of their new program or consider it beneath what they believe their caliber of play is.
LikeLike
I don’t see the SEC having much to gain with Satellite camps. Most of the their recruits come from their footprint and most of their targets can get to their campus with a relatively easy car ride. Maybe Mizzou could gain but the rest of the schools not so much. I also don’t think it would be all that beneficial if SEC schools decide to set up shop in Michigan or Ohio etc.. A satellite camp in the Midwest would maybe draw just a few top recruits with mostly 2 and 3 star talent. That’s not the kind of player the SEC is recruiting. B1G schools on the other hand are looking for under-recruited kids from the south to fill skill position needs.
LikeLike
Forbes on TCU’s Chris Del Conte and realignment.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonbelzer/2015/05/26/how-the-art-of-persuasion-saved-the-tcu-horned-frogs/
While Del Conte’s humble recollection of the events that transpired during the fall of 2011 would lead some to believe that he was simply the conductor of a train riding down a predetermined path, the role his persuasiveness played in securing Texas Christian’s invitation to the Big 12 cannot be emphasized enough. Indeed, if such events were not sufficient evidence, one needs to look no further than a single statistic for all the necessary proof of Del Conte’s amazing ability to influence.
Over the last five years, no one in college athletics has raised more money than Chris Del Conte
LikeLike
Mark Blaudschun on UMass and the AAC.
http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=12496
When Navy agreed to the deal a few years ago, there were expectations, if not guarantees about the membership. Lots of things have changed. The American looks more and more like a second tier conference with second tier teams playing just off Broadway.
Navy doesn’t need that.
So what happens if Navy does decide to bail out. The American will need a 12th team in football at the very least.
Waiting eagerly, ready to accept almost any deal is the University of Massachusetts, which now has a new administration that is trying to revive basketball and save football.
LikeLike
http://www.espnfc.com/world-cup-soccer/story/2468775/fifa-corrupt-over-24-years-says-us-department-of-justice
Someone finally seems to care about corruption in soccer. The US DoJ came down hard on FIFA with charges against 14 people, including 9 FIFA officials. 7 have already been arrested in Switzerland with 6 fighting extradition. The DoJ says they’ve tracked at least 12 corruption schemes stretching over 24 years.
Meanwhile, FIFA plans to go ahead with their presidential election on Friday with the head cheater (although not charged yet) a likely winner.
LikeLike
CBS scheduling news.
http://blogs.theadvocate.com/tigertracks/in-the-daylight-auburn-lsu-set-for-230-p-m-kickoff-on-cbs/
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25198130/louisville-vs-auburn-kicks-off-expanded-2015-sec-on-cbs-schedule
CBS will show more SEC games than ever this year.
The SEC on CBS package of games for the 2015 season is expanding with the network announcing Thursday that it will air contests during the first two weeks of the season, leading with the Chick-fil-A Kickoff Game on Saturday, Sept. 5 between Louisville and Auburn at the Georgia Dome in Atlanta.
CBS will fill its 3:30 p.m. time slot the next week with Georgia at Vanderbilt. The “SEC Game of the Week” in Week 3 will feature Auburn at LSU on Saturday, Sept. 19.
In total, CBS will air 17 games featuring SEC teams, including the annual Florida vs. Georgia showdown on Saturday, Oct. 31, consecutive doubleheaders on Nov. 7 and Nov. 14, and the SEC Championship Game, which is set for Saturday, Dec. 5 at 4 p.m. All games will be streamed online as well on CBSSports.com.
…
Veteran announce team Verne Lundquist and Gary Danielson will return to call the action each week and be joined by reporter Allie LaForce on the sideline.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/111274/nine-cities-bid-to-host-2018-20-college-football-playoff-title-games
9 cities are bidding for the next NCGs in 2018-2020.
Of the nine cities and communities, Houston and Santa Clara were the only ones to bid on all three years. The breakdown on bids by years goes as follows:
2018: Atlanta, Houston, Miami/South Florida, Santa Clara.
2019: Charlotte, Detroit, Houston, New Orleans, San Antonio, Santa Clara.
2020: Charlotte, Houston, Minneapolis, New Orleans, San Antonio, Santa Clara.
It’s be nice to see Detroit or Minneapolis win so the midwest can have at least 1 important postseason game out of the 42 that will be played through 2020 (NY6 + NCG each year).
I’d guess Minneapolis has a better chance than Detroit.
LikeLike
http://cfn.scout.com/2/1549930.html
The latest APRs are out for CFB:
Most Improved Schools from 2014 Report to 2015
1. Louisville +30
2. UTEP +26
3. Maryland +23
4. Michigan, ULM, Cincinnati +18
5 Biggest Freefallers from 2014 Report to 2015
1. Georgia Southern -15
2. Kansas -14
3. TCU -9
4. Wake Forest -8
5. Boise State, New Mexico -7
2015 2014 2013 Change
1 Wisconsin 998 989 985 9
2 Duke 992 992 989 0
2 Northwestern 992 991 996 1
4 Michigan 990 972 951 18
5 Stanford 987 984 978 3
6 Nebraska 985 980 972 5
6 Utah State 985 988 967 -3
8 Clemson 984 983 985 1
9 Vanderbilt 983 974 973 9
10 Army 981 976 971 5
10 Boise State 981 988 993 -7
12 Boston College 980 981 982 -1
12 Rutgers 980 980 978 0
12 Air Force 980 976 974 4
B10 has #1, 3 of the top 4, 4 of the top 6 and 5 of the top 15. Also 7 of the top 25 and 11 of the top 35.
18 Indiana 977 972 963 5
25 Minnesota 975 962 955 13
31 Illinois 973 957 960 16
31 Maryland 973 950 937 23
31 Michigan State 973 962 955 11
31 Ohio State 973 972 982 1
52 Iowa 966 969 961 -3
55 Purdue 964 961 953 3
75 Penn State 956 954 961 2
930 is the cutoff line for getting punished.
LikeLike
Per Brett McMurphy, the SEC will distribute $31.07 million per school, a total of $455 million for the conference. This is up significantly from last year, which was $20.9 million per school, $309.6 million total.
LikeLike
When does their fiscal year end? Given the August launch date, I wonder how much SECN revenue is even in this number. This may just be the tip of the iceberg.
LikeLike
So does this change the projections for the B1G when it goes to the bargaining table in 2016?
LikeLike
A big chunk of that jump is the CFP, I assume. Another big part should be the SECN. I haven’t seen anyone break it down, yet.
LikeLike
Don’t forget the Orange Bowl. That money may or may not be there next year.
LikeLike
Postseason numbers for the SEC:
BCS – $34.2M
CFP – $87.5M
That’s a $53.3M bump right there, or $3.8M per school. Didn’t people say at least $5M each for the SECN? That’s most of the jump right there.
LikeLike
The B1G legacy schools projected distributions of $32 million for FY 2015. Usually projections are conservative. My guess is it will be closer to $33-34 million. Difference is that Maryland, Rutgers and Nebraska are partial shares so they won’t get the full $33 million. Looks like the SEC is distributing evenly to all schools including Mizzou and ATM.
LikeLike
Correction of the SEC revenue distribution, it’s not $31.07mm per school, it’s $31.2.
http://www.secsports.com/article/12975224/2014-15-sec-revenue-distribution
“The total distribution of $455.8 million is the highest in SEC history. The total includes $436.8 million distributed from the conference office, as well as $19.0 million dollars of revenue retained by institutions that participated in 2014-15 bowl games.
The average amount distributed from the conference office, excluding bowl money retained by participants, is slightly over $31.2 million per school.”
LikeLike
Here’s a Yahoo Sports piece with a little SEC/B1G commentary.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/sec-schools-reportedly-getting-more-than–30-million-each-152207430.html
“By comparison, the Big Ten distributed $338.9 million during the 2013-14 fiscal year, according to IRS filings, the most recent data available.
The money from the conference comes from the SEC Network, bowl games, the football championship game, the SEC basketball tournament and more, including other TV contracts. The Big Ten and Pac-12, with their own television networks, have a similar setup.
The reason for the difference in payouts between the SEC and Big Ten is television. The SEC recently signed a contract extension with ESPN which started in 2014. The Big Ten’s current television contracts expire in 2016-2017, so when the conference signs an extension with current partners or new ones (Fox Sports 1 could be a candidate), its payout to schools is likely to increase to a number in line with the SEC’s.”
LikeLike
“The reason for the difference in payouts between the SEC and Big Ten is television.”
Until the Big Ten releases their numbers, I don’t know why a “difference” is being reported. The “difference” may go the other way.
LikeLike
http://www.jconline.com/story/sports/college/purdue/football/2014/04/25/big-ten-schools-expecting-big-payouts-continue/8187133/
The projection from last year was for this year’s payout to be $30.9M per school for those getting a full share. That’d put the total in the neighborhood of $380M (I guessed NE, UMD and RU combine for $40M).
It’s unclear if they factored the new bowl deals and the CFP into that number, but I’ll assume they did just to be conservative.
LikeLike
Here’s a few more details on the SEC revenue distribution from an LSU perspective.
http://theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/12506437-123/sec-schools-will-split-ncaa
LikeLike
Here’s a great piece from Andy Staples on SEC/B1G separation from the rest of the P5.
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/05/29/sec-network-big-ten-revenue-gap
LikeLike
Alan:
“Athletic director Joe Alleva said LSU will use some of its revenue to cover the approximately $2.5 million in startup costs incurred by his department for the SEC Network. Each school was required to build a TV studio and make its venues HD-ready for in-house produced programming on the SEC Network’s website.”
Two questions: Would you know if that is the extent of SEC schools equity stake? And do you know if every school had a similar 2.5 M cost? 2.5 x 14 = 35 M, to enable ESPN’s SECN to operate. I’m not criticizing, just trying to get closer to apples to apples. If it was SEC owned those costs (and more) would probably have been withheld and paid by the conference, not distributed. Thanks. Geaux Tigers.
LikeLike
cc – My understanding is that other school’s had to spend a lot more than LSU to get their in-house production up to ESPN standards. LSU already had pretty solid production facilities and equipment due to its relationship with COX (major corporate sponsor), its preexisting extensive baseball syndication package, and that LSU already produced in-house its coaches shows and PPV football games. Watching the SEC baseball games on SEC+, you can see that most of the schools are not up to LSU’s production standards. I believe that the studio and equipment are property of the individual schools and not ESPN-owned.
Thanks for the “Geaux Tigers!” This Spring is going well so far for my Tigers.
LikeLike
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/campus-corner/article22613511.html
Big 12 is reporting $252 million and $23 to $27 million per school. I’m curious how that is distributed. I thought the 8 long term members received full and equal shares while the newbies might receive less. But if West Virginia and TCU are receiving smaller shares, I think that would be reflected in the numbers presented. Maybe all 10 are getting equal shares and the conference is being purposefully vague.
The spin from Bowlsby, ““Ours is a slightly different model but it compares favorably to other conferences”, referring I guess to tier three money. But aside from Texas, do any Big 12 schools make significantly more than their SEC or B1G counterparts? It says Kansas makes $8 million and K-State makes $4 million, I would imagine that is comparable to other power conference deals.
LikeLike
I saw somewhere that West Virginia and TCU are getting 85%. TCU ended getting more than WV because it made a CFB bowl. Everyone else was near the top.
LikeLike
TCU and WV got a 83,33% B12 distribution share, about $23M on $27M. That ends the phase in. Both schools will receive a full distribution for 2015-16.
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/05/28/baylor-football-ian-mccaw-tough-scheduling-2015-bears-schedule
Baylor is willing to upgrade their OOC schedule, at least a little bit.
Baylor athletic director Ian McCaw Thursday said his team is looking to take on a higher level of competition in the wake of successive years of unchallenging non-conference schedules.
McCaw hinted at the Bears potentially playing an opening weekend, neutral site game “soon,” according to a Fox Sports report, but declined to give specific details.
…
“Obviously, as we’ve won back to back Big 12 championships and our program’s in the national stage and we’re recruiting at an extremely high level and have McLane Stadium in place, we’re able to take on a higher level of competition and that’s what we’re looking to do,” McCaw said.
The athletic director noted that the team was at least open to the idea of facing one Power 5 conference opponent outside of the Big 12, “probably not every year, but a good number of years.”
Baylor has already bolstered it’s non-Big 12 schedule in the coming seasons, scheduling Duke in 2017 and 2018, and Utah in 2023 and 2024.
…
The Bears have not beaten a Power 5 opponent in a non-conference game since defeating Wake Forest during the 2009 season.
When adding Duke is considered bolstering your OOC schedule, you’re doing it wrong.
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/05/29/sec-transfer-rule-serious-misconduct-domestic-violence
The SEC bans transfers in of players dismissed elsewhere for “serious misconduct.”
The SEC passed a rule Friday banning its schools from taking transfer athletes who were dismissed from their previous program for “serious misconduct.” It defines “serious misconduct” as “sexual assault, domestic violence or other forms of sexual violence.”
…
Sankey said the rule does not take into account the legal system but instead uses the previous university’s response as a trigger for the ban. So even a player whose criminal charges were still pending would be banned from transferring to an SEC school. Sankey said that like all other SEC bylaws, this rule would also have a waiver process to cover extraordinary cases.
Good for them. I would’ve liked to see all felonies and serious academic misconduct included in the list, but it’s a step in the right direction. I’m all for the P5 all adding a similar rule.
LikeLike
How long has it been since the BIG went undefeated in the first set of games in the Men’s CWS?
Women’s softball, Michigan and UCLA are playing a great game.
LikeLike
Add
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12976679/prince-shembo-atlanta-falcons-charged-dog-death
Lizzy Seeberg’s “alleged” sexual assaulter from ND has now “allegedly” killed his ex-girlfriend’s dog. Who would have thought he’d turn out to be a bad person after that incident at ND?
LikeLike
After the first day of regionals.
Big Ten: 5-0
ACC: 6-1
SEC: 5-2
Pac-12: 4-2
Big-12: 2-1
The American: 2-2
Beg West: 1-1
Misery Valley: 0-2
Conf USA: 0-3
LikeLike
Apologies for some inaccuracies (and misspelling). B12 is 1-1. Serves me right for copy/paste without noting it.
LikeLike
BIG definitely has a shot at adding 3 more NCAA (emphasis here) team titles for the academic school year. Thus far, BIG has scored 6 NCAA titles – about average for the conference in school year. I’m not sure if the BIG has ever reached double digit NCAA team titles in a school year. I think they came close a couple years ago. I believe only the Pac12 has accomplished this standard & they’ve done it more than once.
The “3 more” titles that can be possibly added are Michigan Softball, Illinois Men’s Golf and Ohio State Rowing (best probability).
I will be happy to see at least one baseball team make the CWS. The first day was a huge surprise.
LikeLike
I don’t know that it would be a surprising to see Illinois make the CWS, and at that point they would certainly have a shot like any other team in the CWS.
LikeLike
Click to access ncaa-2015-heat-sheet-sunday.pdf
OSU rowing did well in the semifinals today, with the top time in both the 1st and 2nd varsity 8s and 4th best in the varsity 4. Scoring is weighted towards the V8s and the petite crews don’t count, apparently:
V8 1 : 1st = 48, 2nd = 45, 42, …
V8 2 : 1st = 32, 2nd = 30, 28, …
V4 : 1st = 16, 2nd = 15, 14, …
Finals are early tomorrow in CA. OSU would be the first school ever to win 3 straight rowing titles.
—
http://golfstatresults.com/public/leaderboards/team/static/nonavteam8027.html
IL led after day 1 and is currently is tied for 2nd, 4 strokes behind USC and tied with UGA, and 4 shots in front of 4th place LSU. Many teams are still playing their rounds today, though.
IL has individuals in 2nd (1 stroke back) and T7.
Format:
1. 54 holes of stroke play on Friday – Sunday
2. Then the top 15 teams and 9 other players play a 4th round on Monday (the 72 hole individual champion is determined here)
3. The top 8 teams advance to match play (quarters and semis on Tuesday, finals on Wednesday) to determine the team champion
—
http://www.ncaa.com/interactive-bracket/softball/d1
With 2 wins to open the WCWS, both #3 MI and #1 UF have advanced to the semis tomorrow. #2 OR has been eliminated as has #8 TN. MI will face the winner of #5 LSU and #6 AL in an elimination game tonight. #4 Auburn and #7 UCLA play tonight as well to see who faces UF.
It’s double elimination to make the finals, then best of 3 in the finals.
LikeLike
Congrats Brian:
As I said in a previous post OSU Rowing had the best chance of securing another NCAA team title for the university, foremost, & BIG in terms of tiles for the school year.
They have done it & in dramatic fashion, just edging second place Cal in the final race.
OSU Rowing is now the first team to 3-peat.
Way to go OSU.
I think Michigan Softball has a real chance at winning it all.
I haven’t checked in with Men’s Golf yet, Illinois seems primed to make the match playoff round, or whatever they call it.
LikeLike
gfunk,
“As I said in a previous post OSU Rowing had the best chance of securing another NCAA team title for the university, foremost, & BIG in terms of tiles for the school year.”
Yes, but not much more of a chance than MI in softball. OSU was ranked #3 coming into the meet despite being the two-time defending champs, probably because we had a young team this year (many/most had never competed at the NCAAs before). Rowing has fewer competitive teams than softball, however.
MI is also #3 and has been playing really well. All 4 teams left have a shot, but obviously MI and UF have the best odds since they haven’t lost yet. I’d say they each have about 40% chance.
“They have done it & in dramatic fashion, just edging second place Cal in the final race.”
I watched the stream of that race. OSU had a decent lead for a while (almost half a boat) and then Cal had to start their sprint early to try to catch up. Cal closed the gap but OSU never let them catch up.
“I haven’t checked in with Men’s Golf yet, Illinois seems primed to make the match playoff round, or whatever they call it.”
After round 2, IL was in second (3 shots behind USC, 4 in front of UGA) as was their top player (2 strokes back). They also had someone T6. They’re just teeing off now for round 3.
LikeLike
I’d say OSU = better odds due to two previous-consecutive titles & not just because they just 3 peated.
Mi is playing well, they’re currently knotted with LSU. But, SEC softball was boss hog this tourney – 5 teams in the CWS, which at least suggests the SEC was the toughest conference. So Mi has a tough road & if they neat LSU here, they’ll have to face the defending champs.
My beloved Minnesota was very close to reaching the regionals, but failed against Az, who in turn got swept by LSU. I believe Minny was the only other softball team from the BIG ranked in the top 25 much of the year.
LikeLike
I just didn’t want to undersell MI’s chances. I’m clearly biased when picking whether an OSU team or a MI team has better chances, so I was trying to be neutral and give MI’s team credit.
MI did advance to the finals against UF. Best 2 out of 3 for the title.
LikeLike
And OSU wins the title.
V8 1: 1st (finished the season unbeaten)
V8 2: 2nd
V4: 5th
That’s the first threepeat in women’s rowing history.
LikeLike
Just beat you on my post. I watched that final race, fantastic finish by OSU, barely edging Cal.
LikeLike
It’s the sort of win that really makes you feel they earned the title. The only two undefeated boats on the season racing head to head in near perfect conditions.
And OSU was young this year, so maybe 4 in a row is possible.
LikeLike
Maryland baseball is the only BIG team to win their second game on Saturday – beating UCLA.
Michigan, Iowa and IU lost close games to the 1 seed in their respective brackets.
Illinois plays ND today (second game).
I really feel for IU, they had the defending NCs on the edge.
One thing is for certain, BIG baseball has gotten much better.
Bummed out that Minnesota is not competitive right now, they are usually one of the top BIG programs.
LikeLike
In the baseball regionals, 21 teams have been eliminated so far.
By seed:
#1 – 2 (UC Santa Barbara & OK State)
#2 – 4 (Ole Miss, East Carolina, Bradley & Coastal Carolina)
#3 – 4 (Texas, Clemson, USF & Oral Roberts)
#4 – 11
P5 schools eliminated so far are OK State, Ole Miss, Texas & Clemson.
15 teams are 2-0, needing to win only one more game to advance to Super Regional play.
#3 Maryland [L.A.]
#3 Virginia [Lake Elsinore]
#2 Arkansas [Stillwater]
#1 Missouri State (8) [Springfield]
#1 Miami (5) [Miami]
#4 VCU leading #2 Oregon State 5-0 in the 6th [Dallas]
#1 Florida State [Tallahassee]
#1 Florida (4) [Gainesville]
#1 LSU (2) [Baton Rouge]
#3 ULL [Houston]
#3 Cal [College Station]
#2 NC State [Ft. Worth]
#1 Illinois (6) [Champaign]
#1 Vandy [Nashville]
#1 CSU Fullerton [Fullerton]
#1 Louisville (3) [Louisville]
LikeLike
Florida and Louisville are the first two teams to advance to Super Regional play. In doing so, Louisville eliminated Michigan 13-4. Radford also eliminated Indiana 5-3.
LikeLike
IL advanced today. Looks like they’ll face Vandy since Vandy is up 20-0.
LikeLike
Today was blowout day as Vandy won 21-0 and Miami leads 20-3 in the 6th. I’ll go ahead and give Miami the win.
Advanced so far:
#1 – 9
#2 – 1
#3 – 2
#4 – 1
Still to play:
#1 vs #2 – 1 (TCU vs NCSU)
#1 vs #3 – 2 (UCLA vs UMD, TAMU vs Cal)
Bad year for second seeds in regionals.
I’d love to see UMD and UVA play in the super regional.
National seeds advanced:
6 of 8 so far with the other 2 still playing
#1 UCLA vs UMD
#7 TCU vs NCSU (NCSU leads 4-1 in the 7th)
LikeLike
TCU, Maryland and A&M all won.
8#1 seeds won in 3 games, 1 #2 seed and 2 #3 seeds.
In the other 5 which went to an elimination game it was 1 vs 2, three 1 vs 3s and a 1 vs 4.
Overall 11 of the 16 #1 seeds made it, 1 #2, 3 #3s and 1 #4.
They got a lot of regional 2nd rounds-looks like it was planned that way, but not always who they expected got there.
2nd round
Maryland vs. Virginia (1s were UCLA and UCSB)
Arkansas vs. Missouri St. (1s were Ok. St. and Missouri St.)
TCU vs Texas A&M (both 1s)
Florida vs Florida St. (both 1s)
LSU vs UL-Lafayette (LSU and Houston were 1s)
Illinois vs Vanderbilt (both 1s)
Miami vs. VCU (Miami and Dallas Baptist were 1s)
Louisville vs. Cal St. Fullerton (both 1s)
LikeLike
6 SEC, 3 ACC, 2 B10, 1 Big 12, 1 MVC, 1 A10, 1 BW, 1 SB, and surprisingly ZERO Pac 12.
LikeLike
Strange year for Sun Belt baseball. Not at surprised the league’s #3 advances to Super Regional.
Conference struggled with consistency and RPI is all about. Could have easily been a 2 or 3 bid league but for the baffling bad games strewn about.
LikeLike
Correction-5 SEC and 4 ACC.
LikeLike
I followed the NC State-TCU game last night with my Wolfpack-loving in-laws in the most old-school of fashions: by listening on my alarm clock radio! That game was a collapse of epic proportions. NC State led 8-1 heading into the bottom of the eighth. TCU scored six runs in the bottom of the eighth, one in the bottom of the ninth, and the winning run in the bottom of the tenth. NCSU went three up, three down in their ninth and tenth inning at-bats. There were numerous pitching changes by NC State, at least two balks, one of which resulted in a bases-loaded forced run. They team will have a really hard time getting over that one.
In case he still browses FTT from time to time, congrats to Jake, the TCU fan who used to post here. TCU has a really, really good team.
LikeLike
@ArkStfan,
I think it’s going to be a tough adjustment for App State sports in general to the Sun Belt. Year in, year out, App State’s men sports dominated the Southern Conference, but this spread out league will be different animal. Yes, it is tougher competition. But the SoCon was pretty good in baseball with App State, Georgia Southern, and Elon having some nice runs in the NCAA tournament.
App State had a great baseball coach a few years ago who left to be the coach at Duke. It sucks, but that’s life as a D-1 mid-major. Hopefully App will adjust to the travel schedule in all sports, be a contender in the Sun Belt, and not drag the league down in any way.
LikeLike
App will be fine. They know how to win, how to sell tickets and fans expect success. Those three things will carry you a long way.
LikeLike
Michigan Softball beats LSU, sorry Alan from Baton Rouge, for a shot at a NC. Florida it is. This will be a great series. Imagine if Mi wins, SEC die hards will be a little heartbroken due to placing 5 of the 8 teams in CWS field. Conventional wisdom often shows that conference dominance in a particular NCAA tourney loses out to the minority team. For example, BIG Men’s Basketball has often whiffed on a NC despite fielding half the final four.
Michigan baseball is on the ropes, not a chance they’ll advance.
IU is done, couldn’t be a tough Radford team again.
Therefore:
Illinois and Maryland are the only baseball teams from the BIG without a loss so far & they have the best opportunity to advance to the Super Regionals.
Iowa won a thrilling pitcher’s duel, extra innings – goodbye Oregon. They’ll have to beat a very good Missouri St. club – twice.
LikeLike
gfunk – congrats. Michigan played a great game and took advantage of a couple Tiger mistakes.
LikeLike
Not a Michigan fan, most sports, esp M. Hockey, they are a rival of Minnesota. I do root for the BIG in most cases when the games are against other conferences & a NC is on the line, but mainly Minnesota teams & MSU M. Hoops (only).
I have a tendency to root for the bigger storyline as well. For example, LSU vs OSU in 2007-8, well I had to go with the Tigers. Katrina and what it did to La, especially, meant a lot for me at least, thus seeing LSU win was great, so was the Saints SB win. But I no doubt rooted for OSU in this year’s CFP.
As for CWS Softball, great to see the NCs being won from teams East of the Mississippi. For too damn long, it was dominated by the teams on the other side, esp the Pac12. I’ll root for Mi over Fl, but not by too much in terms of emotional interest. Love that Mi coach, she’s a classy lady.
LikeLike
Pingback: K-State Slate: 6.1.15 – Beating the Track – Power Cat Insider
Pingback: K-State Slate: 6.1.15 – Beating the Track | SoonerSource.com
Did you all stay up to watch the end of the Rice/Houston baseball game last night? Me neither.
Rice 3
Coogs 2
20 innings
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12991674/uab-blazers-football-return
UAB has reinstated football. Probably will not field a team until 2016 though.
LikeLike
It’s quite a setback for certain U of A BoT members and the UAB president. It’s nice to see the little guy win for once.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/119560/b1g-exploring-more-early-season-and-week-1-league-games
B10 is looking into adding more early September games. This ties back into that scheduling discussion we had recently.
Thanks to both the arrival of the nine-game conference schedule in 2016 and a desire by the league to get its most-desired games front and center, the Big Ten is planning to stage more conference games early in the season, including opening week.
The league has already released its schedules through the 2019 season, which include two opening-week conference games: Ohio State-Indiana in 2017 and Purdue-Northwestern in 2018. At last month’s Big Ten joint meetings, athletic directors were presented with models for September conference games well into the 2020s, including the possibilities for two or more Big Ten games in Week 1.
“We’re trying to find some weeks early in season where we can fit conference games in there,” Big Ten senior associate commissioner Mark Rudner said. “It’s something that really bubbled up from the coaches several years ago, and I think administrators supported that. We want to join the crowd, like everybody seems to be doing.”
…
Big Ten athletic directors support the idea but want to know when exactly those games will be at least a decade into the future, so they can schedule their nonconference games — which almost always happen in September — around them.
This is where things get a little complicated. Because schools schedule so far in advance — some teams already have games lined up in 2027, for example — the Big Ten office has to find holes to make those early-season games work. Rudner noted that seven Big Ten teams have non-league games scheduled for Week 1 in 2020 and five do in 2021, limiting the availability of possible matchups.
The Big Ten would also prefer those early games, especially in Week 1, to be cross-division contests and not the marquee intra-division showdowns or rivalries that it likes to keep for the back end of the schedule.
…
“We saw a mock-up, and we sent it back to the drawing board,” Purdue athletic director Morgan Burke said. “I think what they did helped spark us to … take a look at home and away, how quickly can you cycle through, so that you try to create some balance.”
Rudner said there’s not much debate on which opponents teams will play, as that’s pretty well known through the division setup. But there are other concerns, like having teams play their first conference game on the road several years in a row. Or avoiding a team playing a conference game on the road in Week 1 followed by a road nonconference game the second week.
The league is in no particular hurry to get this all figured out; it’s already well ahead of most other conferences by forming its schedules through 2019. Rudner said another schedule proposal will be presented when the athletic directors meet next in October.
…
But it’s clear that the league is committed to scheduling more and more conference games in September, and that we’re not far away from an opening-week Big Ten game (or games) becoming the new normal. That’s not an entirely revolutionary phenomenon, as Week 1 league contests happened fairly regularly in the late 1970s and early ’80s. But the last time it occurred was in 1996, when Michigan played Illinois and Purdue faced Michigan State to kick off the season.
By the time the 2020s roll around, the Big Ten should be keeping September stuffed full of league action, including a Week 1 with conference race implications.
“It’s probably not a bad idea, because other conferences are doing it and conference games historically have great audiences,” Rudner said. “Our fans love to go to conference games, so why not have a season of them?”
I think they might be surprised at the negative impact this has on attendance for OOC games, especially cupcakes. I also hate to see a team fall behind in the conference race in week 1 while new players are settling into the starting line up.
LikeLike
I hate this move. I get it from a TV perspective, but only from a TV perspective. Week1 is a good week for the lighter nonconference games as a) a week to work out kinks is a good thing and b) it’s football after 9 months off so we don’t care that the match-up sucks.
Further, loosing conference games early takes some of the interest out of the rest of the year. Teams get effectively knocked out of the conference race sooner. Also since the first few weeks can show some results that would never happen at the end of the year, it means it’s more likely you get a poorer team make the CCG.
I can accept this for the TV reasons, but I really hope a) they don’t give any team more than 1 conference game in the first 3 weeks and b) they avoid as many match-ups between teams expected to compete as possible (not just in division, but out of division).
LikeLike
When you only schedule ooc early in the season it doesn’t work well for TV at all. You have too many poor matchups early in the season and too many games to get on TV. Typically later you would have 4 on networks and 3 on the conference channel. Maybe you have 6 and 3. That still leaves 5. There are overflow channels for BTN (and SECN), but you would have to have games on two of those and have games spread out throughout the day.
LikeLike
bullet,
“When you only schedule ooc early in the season it doesn’t work well for TV at all. You have too many poor matchups early in the season and too many games to get on TV. Typically later you would have 4 on networks and 3 on the conference channel. Maybe you have 6 and 3. That still leaves 5. There are overflow channels for BTN (and SECN), but you would have to have games on two of those and have games spread out throughout the day.”
I don’t completely agree. There are several related problems:
1. Too many bad games all on one Saturday. That’s separate from when this weekend occurs. The SEC has had the same issue with I-AA Saturday in November as the B10 has had with MAC Saturday in September. Usually the B10 had 1 or 2 good games every OOC weekend, but on occasion everybody had MACtion or worse. This can be fixed by making sure multiple schools play a good game each weekend.
2. Too many games all at once. This is also a problem no matter when the weekend occurs. 14 games is too many to fit in the available TV windows conveniently. This isn’t a problem the first weekend because the B10 can play on that Thursday night and Sunday is also available (sometimes even Monday). For other weekends, this is where scheduling early conference games helps with the problem.
3. Limited marquee games in September. This is a function of who you schedule OOC more than anything. Most of the nation doesn’t care more about OSU vs PU than they do OSU vs UNC. What you need are games against teams like OR, TX, OU, USC, AL, etc and the B10 is adding them.
4. Too few games some weekends. Thanks to bye weeks, sometimes there are as few as 5 B10 games in a weekend. Adding in some OOC games can keep that number at 6 as a minimum.
5. Scheduling availability. It’s much harder to schedule major OOC games outside September. That means fewer major OOC games because some Saturdays are pre-booked and more cupcakes later in the year when nobody wants to see them. If they think September attendance and ratings are bad for MAC games, what will they be in October or November?
One important thing is to look at their solution. They want to move crossover B10 games earlier, especially non-marquee ones. I suppose that’s good for saving the best games for later in the season, but it won’t build much excitement for those early games. It sounds in part like they are doing this just because other conferences do. I think games like MSU/OR and WI/AL draw more attention than crossover B10 games do. I also don’t see a big problem with all the OOC games early in the season. TV has figured it out before. Maybe they add an overlapping TV window in September at 1:30 to make more space.
LikeLike
The Big Ten Conference should move to a ten game conference schedule at the earliest point possible. It would mean fewer games with programs from the Group of Five conferences and more within the conference itself.
If a program wanted to schedule itself into one of the 41 (soon to be 42) bowls, then have a couple of pay for play contests on the slate to ensure seven home games and the two “guaranteed” wins. With one home-and-home series, programs would have alternating seasons of six and seven home games. Two home-and-home series means six home/six road games each season.
This should be coupled with playing Big Ten Conference games in Weeks 1 and 2 in order to enhance interest in the conference during the early part of the season.
2016 is the first season that the B1G goes to the nine conference game schedule. Here’s the OOC games for each program in the Eastern Division plus the teams in the Western division that the particular team is not playing:
Indiana OOC: at Florida International, Ball State, Wake Forest
Indiana Not Playing: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin
Maryland OOC: Howard, at Florida International, at Central Florida
Maryland Not Playing: Illinois, Iowa, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Michigan OOC: Hawaii, Central Florida, Colorado
Michigan Not Playing: Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue
Michigan State OOC: Furman, at Notre Dame, Brigham Young
Michigan State Not Playing: Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue
Ohio State OOC: Bowling Green, Tulsa, at Oklahoma
Ohio State Not Playing: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Purdue
Penn State OOC: Kent State, at Pittsburgh, Temple
Penn State Not Playing: Illinois, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Rutgers OOC: at Washington, Howard, New Mexico
Rutgers Not Playing: Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin
Three of the seven teams above are playing FCS programs (Howard or Furman) and those games should be the ones swapped out for a Big Ten opponent. Three of the other four teams have games with Power 5 Conference opponents that they should likely keep (Maryland is the only exception). Those are games that should likely be kept.
LikeLike
cutter,
“The Big Ten Conference should move to a ten game conference schedule at the earliest point possible.”
Ten out of twelve, or do you consider the addition of a 13th game the “earliest point possible” realistically? I just don’t see schools leaving themselves only 2 OOC games and needing 2 home games to fund the AD. That would eliminate almost all of the major intersectional games for the B10 unless the neutral site games really paid well.
“This should be coupled with playing Big Ten Conference games in Weeks 1 and 2 in order to enhance interest in the conference during the early part of the season.”
But if they’re playing 2 cupcakes, don’t they need to get at least one out of the way early when fans are grateful for any game to watch? Do you really want 20% of the B10 season over by Flag Day?
“Three of the seven teams above are playing FCS programs (Howard or Furman) and those games should be the ones swapped out for a Big Ten opponent.”
Those games are supposed to be going away anyway and be replaced with I-A games.
“Three of the other four teams have games with Power 5 Conference opponents that they should likely keep (Maryland is the only exception).”
But would they keep the P5 home and home or keep the 2 cupcakes to have 7 home games? A team that thinks it is in the running for the CFP may keep the P5 game, but I think most others would prefer the home game.
LikeLike
cutter,
“The Big Ten Conference should move to a ten game conference schedule at the earliest point possible. It would mean fewer games with programs from the Group of Five conferences and more within the conference itself.”
I responded to your plan above, but wanted to play with the hypothetical of it. Do you drop divisions with 10 games?
Divisions:
10 = 6 locked in division + 4/7 crossovers
10 = 6 locked in division + 1 locked crossover + 3/6 crossovers
Conference:
10 = 5 locked + 5/8
10 = 4 locked + 6/9
10 = 3 locked + 7/10
10 = 2 locked + 8/11
Personally, I’d drop divisions and the CCG. But knowing they insist on that CCG money, I’d keep divisions (a CCG make more sense to me if there are subsets) but add a locked crossover (locks some old rivalries) and play the rest of the other division 50% of the time. I’d stop doing home and homes and rotate those 3 every season so players face all 13 teams in just 2 years.
OSU – IL (rivalry)
MI – MN (rivalry)
PSU – NE (rivalry sort of, plus a big TV game)
MSU – WI (new rivalry)
UMD – IA (what was left, gets a sizable brand in DC)
RU – NW (NYC vs Chicago, plus NW has a lot of alumni in NYC I believe)
IN – PU (rivalry)
LikeLike
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2015/06/01/Media/ESPN-college-football.aspx
Finally. Mark May will be off College Football Final this year. Too bad they’re keeping him on the network.
ESPN will have a trio of new faces on its popular postgame college football studio show this season, according to several sources.
The network has settled on Adnan Virk to host the show, with Joey Galloway and Danny Kanell providing analysis. The three also will appear in-studio during halftime and after games. They will be featured on both ABC and ESPN.
Virk, Galloway and Kanell replace Rece Davis, Lou Holtz and Mark May, who had been with “College Football Final” since 2005.
Davis, who hosted “College Football Final” since 1999, is moving over to host ESPN’s popular college football pregame show, “College GameDay.” May, who has been with the show since 2001, is moving to another college-focused studio show with host John Saunders and former Texas coach Mack Brown. Holtz retired in April.
LikeLike
I like John Saunders and I think Mack Brown has done a good job as an analyst. Mark May has a Napoleon Dynamite voice but with superspeed, an Eeyore attitude, and a Skip Bayless I’m-always-right smugness. He’s not at all entertaining, just obnoxious. Rece Davis, who is a real pro at what he does, has long deserved better than to manage nonsense out of May and, to a lesser degree, a sort of out of touch Lou Holtz. Saunders and Brown do, too.
I suppose in the new College Football Final show, Kanell will fill the void of trying to stir the pot. That, to me, is where the comparisons end. Kanell takes alternative perspectives in a way where he backs up what he says with these things called reasons. He respects others’ opinions, whereas May didn’t.
LikeLike
Illinois Men’s Golf prevailed & earned first place for match play. Despite demonstrating far more consistency than 8th place UCLA, whom Illinois finished ahead of by 17 stroke. Unfortunately, this damn format gives the Bruins life.
UCLA, despite its lack of consistency, shot the lowest round of 4 amongst the last 8 teams – 280. Illinois’ best round was a 282.
http://golfstatresults.com/public/leaderboards/team/static/nonavteam8027.html
Consistency doesn’t seem to be rewarded in this format – I call mostly BS.
Anyways.
Let’s see if Michigan Softball and Illinois Men’s Golf can bring home 2 more NCAA titles for those tied to conference homerism.
LikeLike
I’m not a big fan of match play either. Still IL is in a good position. They outplayed each of the other 7 schools on at least 2 out of 4 rounds.
LikeLike
Wow! Michigan Softball should of gambled at the top of 7th. They had tying run on 3rd, not outs & the Fl player had her back to home plate during a ground ball & double play attempt. I highly doubt she would have made the throw to home. Furthermore, she was not able to convert the double play.
So Mi stranded 2 runners (1st and 3rd) with 2 outs to go, just couldn’t close the score.
Bottom line, Mi has yet to beat FL this year, 3 tries – all close games.
Florida’s best pitcher is on deck for tomorrow night’s game.
LikeLike
^ Pardon the grammar – using an iPad – not the best for writing.
LikeLike
BIG Baseball Update, and glad to be back on my laptop:
Maryland and Illinois make the Super Regionals.
They respectively face last year’s national champion and runner up. Ouch!
Vandy certainly reminded Illinois, home field or not, they can score 21 runs while leaving the other team with 0 to earn their bid. Va outscored USC in two games 20-11 and will have home field against the Terps. Va went through a California bracket in Cali.
Time for the Terps and Illini to make a statement. Terps proved they can beat a program that is only two years removed from a NC. So why not . . .
LikeLike
Saw your comment. Did you know MD and UVA shared a charter flight home? Apparently things were reasonably civil but the gloves come off soon enough.
Nemo
LikeLike
Query… if each of the five PF conferences had to eliminate one school, who would each eliminate? http://atlanticcoastconfidential.com/2015/06/02/the-conferences-weakest-links/ What do you think? Post here or there.
The easiest two were Wake Forest and Washington State. It got progressively harder.
LikeLike
Why on earth would you pose such a silly question?
LikeLike
Are you serious?
LikeLike
Yes, I believe he is. What possible scenario would require each P5 conference to drop a school without replacing it? What problem are they trying to address by shrinking? That might help in the decision process. As written, it sounds like an excuse to pick on the little guys. Everybody already knows which schools those are.
If you want to play hypotheticals, try picking the most mutually beneficial 5-way school trade among the P5 conferences (ignore the travel issues for the P12 schools). Or do it for the eastern 4 only.
LikeLike
That is a great idea!
LikeLike
So which is it for the Big 10, Brian? Assume Texas said it would come, but only if Baylor and Texas Tech also came… and that meant losing one current Big 10 school… who would go?
LikeLike
3 way is pretty easy. WVU to the ACC, NCSU to the SEC, Arkansas to the Big 12. Gets tougher when you throw in the Big 10.
LikeLike
bullet,
“3 way is pretty easy. WVU to the ACC, NCSU to the SEC, Arkansas to the Big 12. Gets tougher when you throw in the Big 10.”
That’s one option. What about MO -> B12 instead? It’s a bigger market and adds some rivalries for the northern schools.
4 way:
ACC – needs FB power
B10 – needs western football and hoops plus demographics
B12 – needs markets
SEC – needs academics and hoops
WV -> ACC
NCSU -> SEC
Vandy -> B10
IL -> B12
LikeLike
Shirley, you jest?
LikeLike
My guess would be click hunting,,,and don’t call me Shirley.
LikeLike
Isn’t that the point of blogging?
LikeLike
The article is lunatic in the extreme.
Conferences exist because their members have many things in common, including most especially their academic cultures and goals. The quality of each school’s athletic programs is a very secondary consideration to the other conference members.
In the case of the B1G these are:
1. Mostly large, public, land grants schools that are their state’s flagship school.
2. Large, high quality, well (externally) funded research programs and graduate schools with AAU status.
2. Large, high quality, comprehensive undergraduate programs.
4. Comprehensive sports coverage with at least an attempt at the student-athlete ideal. The B1G is actually pretty close in that regard especially in the nonrevenue sports. Only the Ivies achieve the ideal in all sports.
5. Mostly Yankeeland and Midlands with some Appalachia. (See https://jaymans.wordpress.com/american-nations-series/)
6. Contiguity. This is part travel and mutual awareness and part civic culture. See 5.
These cultural considerations determine membership, not football program success or failure. And that is true of each of the P5 and the Ivies. It is why the service academies should not be in conferences.
Money counts, and current conference members will not admit school that is likely to reduce payouts. But listen to the AD’s and Presidents; the list above is critically important to them.
All of the current B1G members meet almost all the criteria and belong. That includes Penn State, Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers. Northwestern, like Purdue, was a charter member of the B1G. No one is leaving the B1G, nor will anyone be asked to leave.
Any new members of the B1G will meet all or nearly all of these criteria. The only candidates left are Kansas and Missouri, hence Gee’s comments. Failing Kansas and Missouri, there will not be any new members to the B1G. Texas and Notre Dame will not join the B1G.
LikeLike
Real simple analysis–if a conference had to lose a school–which one would they choose? Not whether they would shed a school, but if they did, who would they shed.
LikeLike
Vanderbilt in the SEC… Wake Forest in the ACC… Washington State in the Pac 12…
Purdue in B10, many would argue Northwestern but NW provides a lot of what Illinois doesn’t in the large state of Illinois, especially in the Chicago area. Indiana is a much smaller state so Purdue doesn’t add as much value and actually takes away some value from Indiana (University)… I know many would argue Rutgers but NJ is a populous state, Rutgers is the lone Div I football program in the state Rutgers neighbors a very valuable market with a lot of B10 alumni.
Big XII is much more difficult, lots of ‘meh’ programs with small fan bases that aren’t historically good at revenue sports. Iowa State, Kansas State, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech. Oklahoma State is thankful they have one very wealthy and generous alumnus.
LikeLike
Dude,
Purdue is a charter member of the BIG. There would be no BIG w/o Purdue. Purdue would never be voted out…
LikeLike
At some point I could see Northwestern going Ivy. Possibly too expensive for them to keep up with the facilities arms race.
LikeLike
Kevin,
20 – 25 years ago, I would have agreed with you. I think NU has achieved some athletic success and that has been ingrained in the culture there on campus. Many of my friends that graduated in the late 80s or early 90s have commented on that change. I think NU will stick with its athletics, it does bring a sense of balance to the school. And, it’s a great look for the BIG.
LikeLike
Northwestern had a lengthy drought from 1972-94, when they never won more than four football games a season, hitting that mark only twice. That period included 14 seasons with two wins or fewer, and one particularly miserable six-year stretch (1976-81) with only four wins in total.
If they didn’t give up big-time athletics then, it’s hard to imagine them doing so now.
LikeLike
I don’t think Northwestern would join the Ivy League, but perhaps a conference made entirely of private schools could happen.
LikeLike
Yes. Name the single school ever booted (and subsequently re admitted) from a power conference. Hint: for this exercise we include the now defunct BEast as a power conference.
LikeLike
It seems like the premise is critical. Different people might date the loss of power status of the Big East differently … partly on issues of semantics, such as whether you date a departure to when it is committed to or when it is executed. But if the Big East was still a power conference when Temple rejoined (from the MAC), it was only just barely, hanging on by a thread that proceeded to snap.
LikeLike
But the point is that people start talking like kicking a school out of a power conference is a reasonable premis when discussing realignment, when there has been either zero or one (depending on definition of power) example. Ever. It is worse than a useless discussion.
LikeLike
Big East was cannibalized out but I think a case can be made for the WAC. They were part of the CFA TV deal and briefly in the major bowl selection process.
LikeLike
No.
Just no.
LikeLike
Hard to refute such a well reasoned argument.
But WAC was in the CFA with the ACC Big 8, SEC, SWC and later Big East and select independents. Other indies the MAC and Big West were not included and pre-1981 other I-A leagues excluded included Southland, Southern and MoValley.
Rewrite history but fact remains they were in the first power group.
LikeLike
“But WAC was in the CFA with the ACC Big 8, SEC, SWC and later Big East and select independents.”
Interesting “power” group. B10 and Pac8/10 not in “power” category?
LikeLike
Made their own deal
LikeLike
CUSA and WAC were, I think the term was “equity” conferences. The P5, BE and those two all got 3 votes when the NCAA was reorganized after the mass movement of the mid-90s. Big West and MAC were not. Later when the WAC split, it lost that distinction and got 1.5 votes alone with the MAC and BW/SB. CUSA stayed as a “power” conference until the latest restructuring.
Equity conferences were basically the CFA + the B10/P10.
LikeLike
I guess it’s semantics, but I don’t think of a conference that has had 27 former full members, lost two of its six founding members in ’78 (shortly after the CFA formed) as a “power” conference just because it wasn’t relegated with the small number who weren’t “equity” conferences. If you are D1 and haven’t been raided, or have membership that can withstand a few defections with minimal impact, you are a power. That doesn’t make you impervious to the unexpected in the future, but it is far less likel.
LikeLike
Temple
LikeLike
Temple was a special case. An associate rather than equity member.
They were under mandate to meet certain targets or be expelled. The first few years Temple would meet with the commissioner declare signs of progress and new plans to make progress.
New president supposedly wanted to drop football. Rolls into the sit down with the commissioner and says Temple didn’t meet the standards and never would. Commissioner informs membership they agree to boot Temple following upcoming season. Temple Board members find out and lobby the Big East but all they get is an extra three years.
Temple situation was very unique.
LikeLike
http://www.espnfc.us/fifa-world-cup/story/2476623/fifa-president-sepp-blatter-resigns-amid-corruption-scandal
Sepp Blatter has announced his resignation (but he is likely to stick around for another 4+ months anyways). He is also, reportedly, being investigated by the FBI.
LikeLike
John Oliver must have serious influence. He asks/begs, and is almost instantly rewarded. Hope he enjoys that Bud.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/movies/video-john-oliver-sepp-blatter-rant/
LikeLike
B10’s last round of expansion (Maryland, Rutgers) imo was a battle versus the ACC for the very populous and fertile recruiting grounds (both revenue sports) of the Mid Atlantic states/markets; NYC, Philadelphia, New Jersey, Maryland, Washington DC…
The Mid Atlantic region 3 years ago was strictly ACC territory, now it’s a mix of B10, ACC football with Big East basketball in the mix. B10 saw a need to resolve its demographic issues and added two very good universities that were located exactly where the B10 wanted to be while damaging the ACC in the process…
B10’s penetration in those markets isn’t near as strong as we’d like but there is enough population in the Mid Atlantic that the B10 will be happy sharing those markets with the ACC.
LikeLike
LSU v. USC for the National Championship in men’s golf.
http://www.lsusports.net/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=5200&ATCLID=210127193
LikeLike
Congrats Alan. LSU and USC were hiding in the weeds during the round of 8. Great performances by both.
I watched the Illinois’ golfers, two in particular, melt down on the last 5 holes.
It’s been more than a half a century since LSU last won a NC. USC, shockingly, has never played for one.
LikeLike
Illinois KO’d from semifinals of M. Golf – USC prevails.
No doubt Illinois has become a strong program and they certainly dazzled in stroke play. But they really choked against USC, latter rounds.
After some consideration, I believe it is match play, not cumulative stroke play, that best prepares these young men for a professional career.
As for Michigan Softball, I think they lose tonight. I would not be surprised to see them win, but same goes if they get soundly beaten. They are facing the most formidable pitcher in College Softball tonight.
Michigan made the sort of regrettable mistake, game 1, that generally costs a team a NC or title of some sort. You can find the story of last night’s game online. I watched it, and clearly shook my head at the moment, bottom of the 7th.
In all, a very good season for BIG sports – they’ll go out with at least 7 NCAA titles, as well as other non-NCAA titles. It would be awesome to see Illinois and Maryland advance to the CWS final – hmmmmm.
LikeLike
MI scored in the 1st and held on to win 1-0 to force a deciding game 3.
LikeLike
Don’t mind being wrong here Brian.
I just caught the tail end of this game at the gym.
The trajectory for this series suggests a thrilling, low scoring game 3.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12999779/college-football-playoff-semifinals-start-4-pm-et-new-year-eve
They announced the kickoffs for the semis this season:
1. 12/31 @ 4pm ET
2. 12/31 @ 8pm
The Cotton and the Orange will be the hosts. The order of the games will be determined when the pairings are set.
Wouldn’t it make the most sense to start the Orange first and the Cotton later just based on location? Do they want 1 vs 4 and then 2 vs 3 every year? On NYE, I’d think ending before midnight would be highly desirable.
The Peach will be the noon 12/31 game with the Fiesta on 1/1 @1pm.
LikeLike
So the Fiesta will be at 10 am local time.
These people just make no sense.
It would be so easy to have the Orange or Cotton at 8pm on 12/31 and the other at 1pm on 1/1 while letting the Fiesta be at 4pm on 12/31. It would be so much better in so many ways.
Them doing the playoffs makes the NCAA rulebook look logical.
LikeLike
Actual realignment news.
http://www.953theticket.com/?p=9879
Vice President of the Sun Belt Conference’s Executive Committee says they hope to evaluate changes within the next 30-45 days. Specifically talking about NMSU as a full member.
LikeLike
And UAB keeping football is realignment news as well. Probably triggered SB comments. Before it was likely CUSA kicks out UAB and grabs a SB school.
LikeLike
Main thing UAB announcement does is remove the concerns of a raid. Dr Hudson told me a couple weeks ago they were looking at some FCS schools and AState would continue to push for NMSU.
LikeLike
I’m happy to see UAB stay. There the closest thing Rice has to a peer institution in CUSA.
LikeLike
The LSU Fightin’ Tigers men’s golf team beat USC 4-1 to win the national championship! It first in golf in 60 years and fifth overall.
http://www.secsports.com/article/13005652/lsu-wins-ncaa-golf-championship
GEAUX TIGERS!
LikeLike
This is the 3rd straight NC in men’s golf for the SEC and 6th since 1999.
LikeLike
This is LSU’s 46th national championship in eight different sports.
LikeLike
Impressive. Congrats to Tiger nation.
LikeLike
Alan,
Yeah I mentioned LSU’s NC layoff until today in a previous post. Congrats to LSU.
Are you counting more than just NCAA titles in your post? It seems like my source says LSU = 43 NCAA titles, including today’s championship. See page 4, below link, then add the golf title as the records via NCAA are only through July 2014. LSU seems to be neck and neck with Arkansas for total lead in the SEC. Take Ark’s total and add one as well, they won an NCAA title in W. Indoor Track & Field – this school year. But they have more vacated titles than LSU.
Click to access Overall.pdf
To Everyone,
As for this school year, here’s a break down of NCAA (<– emphasis here) titles per P5, alphabetical order – still a few sports to go, so changes will obviously come, likely for the SEC and PAC12.
ACC = 4
M. Basketball (Duke), M. Soccer (Virginia), W. Soccer (FSU), & M. Tennis (Virginia)
The ACC no doubt has a shot in baseball, well at least in terms of earning CWS bids, which they do well. But they are the biggest underachievers in the CWS, just awful luck. In fact amongst all college sports, ACC baseball underachieves the most – even worse than BIG M. Basketball due to the CWS format & the fact that they only have a pair of NCAA titles, actual membership. I feel for ACC Baseball. Look at FSU's CWS appearances record – no NC to show for them, UNC is in a similar boat, though FSU Baseball is tragic.
BIG = 7
W. Cross Country (MSU), W. Volleyball (PSU), W. Hockey (Minny), W. Bowling (Neb), Wrestling (OSU), W. Lax (Maryland), & W. Rowing (OSU)
Yet again BIG M. Basketball finishes second. I don't see the BIG winning another title for the school year. Their last shot was softball & Mi just lost to Fl in the NC series. A great year for OSU. They win the title for bad ass tough guys – football (non-NCAA) & wrestling titles.
BIG12 = 3
Rifle (WVa), M. Gymnastics (OU) & M. Swimming (Tx)
Great to finally see OU on top of M. Gymnastics, they've been finishing second quite a bit the past decade, esp to various BIG teams.
PAC12 = 6
M. Cross Country (Colorado), W. Swimming (Cal), M. Indoor Track & Field (Oregon), W. Golf (Stanford), M. Water Polo (UCLA), & W. Water Polo (Stanford)
Can the PAC12 catch the BIG? Perhaps they can via M. Track & Field (Oregon). Will anyone ever care about Water Polo outside of the PAC12? Anyone?
SEC = 5
M. Golf (LSU), W. Gymnastics (Fl), W. Softball (Fl), W. Tennis (Vandy), & W. Indoor Track & Field & (Ark)
Can the SEC catch the BIG? I think they can, especially via baseball and track and field. In fact they may reach 8. A great year for Fl, thus far.
Let me know if the stats are off, since this site blows when it comes to edit functions.
LikeLike
gfunk,
I know you specifically pointed out you were talking about NCAA titles only. I just wanted to mention that several sports are run by other groups than the NCAA but still award national titles. And that skips football, of course.
For OSU:
Pistol (run by the NRA) – 7 titles
Synchronized swimming (run by Team USA) – 29 titles
I’m sure there are other minor sports out there not run by the NCAA but legitimate nonetheless. There are as many major schools competing in these sports as in some NCAA ones.
LikeLike
US Quidditch does the Quidditch World cup.
Texas just won its 3rd straight title. We are a Quidditch dynasty.
I still can’t get over that people really run around on brooms and do this.
LikeLike
Arkansas State has or had a team. My daughter came home wearing a shirt. I asked if she was playing and gave me a patented 19 year old’s eye roll and said they were selling them as a fundraiser. Later said the running around with brooms is stupid but she loves Harry Potter as evidenced by the credit card bill from the trip she and my wife took to Universal last week.
LikeLike
bullet,
“US Quidditch does the Quidditch World cup.”
Synchronized swimming is an Olympic sport which is why Team USA runs the championship.
Pistol shooting is also an Olympic sport, but the NCAA only sponsors rifle shooting for some reason.
I think that’s a little different than Quidditch.
LikeLike
gfunk – your list doesn’t count three LSU’s football titles in 1958, 2003 and 2007.
LikeLike
Alan, I won’t count football titles in the same post as NCAA titles.
As Brian understands, I’m sticking with NCAA titles, though the non-NCAA titles he brings to mind (pistol, synchronized swimming, we could add others here) do not have the controversial history of say football NCs. But for various reasons such sports remain non-NCAA sponsored.
So sure LSU’s football titles matter – absolutely I just assumed you weren’t counting those as it’s pretty standard to separate such due to the varying, evolving history of polls. I thought you might have been counting titles in another sport, like equestrian, where SEC schools are strong.
LikeLike
gfunk – Here’s what I said above.
“This is LSU’s 46th national championship in eight different sports.”
I didn’t limit my statement to NCAA championships, you did. And yes, I count LSU’s football NCs in their national championship count totals. For the record, the seven other sports are or were NCAA-sactioned championships at the time.
FWIW, the NCAA’s website lists football national championships on its website as well.
http://www.ncaa.com/history/football/fbs
LikeLike
Word Alan : ).
I’m not sure I want get into the inclusion of football titles when counting with other types, esp the NCAA. Until the CFP, polling and computers were too influential for my taste.
As I said, I thought you were talking about other non-NCAA titles except football – perhaps equestrian, pistol, or other sports with a non-polling process and not always sponsored by the NCAA (w. volleyball and w. softball awarded numerous NC’s before NCAA sponsorship). Who knows, maybe LSU has titles in the above contexts that you may not have counted.
Btw, I am aware that the NCAA started that tracker for FBS football, maybe this past Jan. I know that the Director’s Cup actually factors FBS football.
When I tally Minnesota’s national titles, I stick with the NCAA. Once upon a time, Minny won a handful of football titles : ). Minny also has a number of non-NCAA hockey titles, men and women. I just don’t count them unless specific distinctions are made. I know some people like to count Helms basketball titles as well, various message boards. Whatever rocks your boat. I don’t count these either, and Minnesota has a pair.
LikeLike
gfunk – I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I think most fans of schools that have won any type of national championship in football will count them. If I were a Gopher fan, I’d count them too. Y’all beat out my Tigers for the first AP title for Pete’s sake. Whether it be AP, UPI, CNN-USAT, USAT, FWAA, BCS, or CFP, I think they all should count. Football is the most important sport as it pays the freight for almost all the others. Now, I don’t count the retroactive football MNCs prior to 1936, even though my Tigers would pick up at least one more. I know the Ivys, Michigan, and Bama had some great teams in the leather helmet days, but I just don’t see how you can retroactively award MNCs.
LikeLike
Alan from Baton Rouge,
“gfunk – I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I think most fans of schools that have won any type of national championship in football will count them.”
I think the majority of people count titles the way you do.
I tend to add titles from legitimate outside bodies for minor sports for several reasons:
1. OSU has a lot of them
2. Sometimes as many teams compete in these as for some of the small NCAA sports
3. The NCAA has taken over running championships from other bodies in many sports (especially the AIAW for women’s sports) and the previous titles are often included in the counts for those sports
However, I realize the average fan doesn’t count those titles.
“Whether it be AP, UPI, CNN-USAT, USAT, FWAA, BCS, or CFP, I think they all should count. … Now, I don’t count the retroactive football MNCs prior to 1936, even though my Tigers would pick up at least one more. I know the Ivys, Michigan, and Bama had some great teams in the leather helmet days, but I just don’t see how you can retroactively award MNCs.”
I tend to mostly count the poll titles and CFP as well, but will acknowledge some of the earlier titles. Teams like 1901 MI deserve a title (11-0 record, 555-0 total score), but it was not really the same game back then and was so regional due to travel difficulties. I generally go with the consensus champs from the pre-poll era (if most of those selectors picked 1 school, only they get to claim it). As long as a major selector picked them, I’ll accept a school/fan claiming a title though.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/119664/early-b1g-picks-suggest-east-west-talent-chasm
Preseason magazines predict a wide talent gap between the West and East in the B10.
Two of the big ones — Athlon and Phil Steele — have unveiled their choices for the 2015 All-Big Ten teams. You can find Steele’s here, while Athlon’s Big Ten preview issue is on newsstands now.
They are fun reads — unless you happen to be a fan of one of the teams in the Big Ten West Division. Then you might be a little alarmed about the seemingly large talent gap between the West and heavy hitters in the East Division.
Consider: Of Steele’s 24 preseason All-Big Ten offensive and defensive players (he includes 12 for each side for some reason), a whopping 20 of them hail from the East Division. The outlook from Athlon isn’t much different, as it picks 17 of the top 22 players on offense and defense from the beast that is the East.
Steele goes four teams deep on his predictions, but the East still dominates when you include all the selections. Just 38 of the 96 players he chose on offense and defense represent the West, or less than 40 percent of the selections.
There are a couple of reasons for this gulf in (respected) talent, especially at the higher end.
The dominance of Ohio State and Michigan State: … So is this an East-West talent gap, or is the rest of the league simply trying to catch up to the new Big Two?
The upper-echelon talent drain from the West after the 2014 season. …
The only two West Division players to make the first team on offense or defense for both Steele and Athlon were from Wisconsin: running back Corey Clement and linebacker Vince Biegel. The Badgers account for half of Steele’s first-team West Division picks and four of the five from Athlon, which also chose safety Michael Caputo and offensive tackle Tyler Marz. That makes the West look even shallower on elite players.
Of course, we must remember that these are only preseason picks, which are based mostly on last seasons’s results. New stars will stand out, preseason darlings will fail to live up to hype, etc. These preseason choices are wrong all the time (I speak from personal experience here).
Still, concern already exists that there’s a growing imbalance of power between the West and the East, the latter of which is looming as perhaps one of the toughest divisions in football. Think about this: Michigan is notably underrepresented on these preseason teams, with zero first-team selections from either publication, only two total on Athlon’s second and third teams and five on Steele’s top four teams for offense and defense. That is an anomaly that almost certainly won’t last long with Jim Harbaugh in charge. Penn State’s talent level is also sure to rise thanks to James Franklin’s recruiting efforts.
Will the West be able to keep up, especially as the Big Ten increasingly turns its attention eastward and East Division teams benefit from being closer to major recruiting centers? Perhaps that’s too serious of a question to be tackled from such light summer reading. But it is one the West teams will eventually need to be answer.
LikeLike
Not a fan of Steele. Last year AState QB Fredi Knighten was first team all-conference player of the year. Steele doesn’t have him among the top 4 QBs in the league this year, which will be the first for Knighten to be in the same system as the year before.
Steele has a decent track record projecting standings except for the Belt where they tend to be one of the worst.
LikeLike
I’d assume the G5 conferences are generally harder to predict as less is known about the players and the coaches, and the talent is more unpredictable (which undersized or whatever guys excel and which prove the P5 coaches right to not sign them).
LikeLike
You would think but Steele has a good history picking the MAC and fair with MWC.
Overestimating the impact of AState coaching changes and forgetting the player you named top QB a few months ago was a junior last year seem to be uniques issues.
LikeLike
I’m not trying to defend him. I don’t know enough about his methods or his results to have an informed opinion. I do know he has the most thorough (and ugliest) CFB preview magazine, and that’s about it. He’s a go to source for returning starters as well.
LikeLike
The talent gap between the East and West is very evident in recruiting per 247Sports’ 2016 team recruiting ratings. FIVE East teams are currently in the top 25 (OSU #2, MSU #11, PSU #12, Michigan #23, and Maryland #24). the West’s two highest rated teams are Minnesota (#27) and Nebraska (#32), next highest is Rutgers at #46. No other B1G teams are in the top 50.
LikeLike
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaa-hits-unc-5-violations-wake-academic-scandal-172614849–spt.html
The NCAA has charged North Carolina with five violations connected to the school’s long-running academic fraud scandal, including a lack of institutional control for poor oversight of an academic department popular with athletes
….
All five charges are considered Level I violations, described by the NCAA as a ”severe breach of conduct.”
LikeLike
Now if only the NCAA could retroactively award that 2005 basketball title to Illinois…
LikeLike
My son and I were at that Final Four rooting for NC…. Not Carolina
LikeLike
Click to access matrix.pdf
Based on the NCAA’s new punishment matrix (if that’s what applies here), UNC could get hammered.
LikeLike
If it’s not and SMU death penalty, I will stop watching college sports.
LikeLike
Get ready to stop watching sports. With the size of TV contracts today, the death penalty is off the table. The ACC wouldn’t necessarily be able to fulfill their agreements (or would have to supply lesser games, at least) and the networks could sue the NCAA for forcing a breach of contract or diminished value (or whatever the proper legal terms would be) in that case.
The strictest allowable penalties for a Level I violation with aggravating circumstances (and UNC may face 4 of these):
1. Games – 2-4 year postseason ban (each sport impacted – CFB, MBB, etc)
2a. Fine – $5000 plus 3-5% of budget, or negate the revenue from the impacted seasons of each sport
2b. Fine – Reduce or eliminate their NCAA distribution of money (think all those hoops $$$)
3. Scholarships – 25-50% in each sport
4. Show cause order – 5-10 years
5. HC suspension – 50-100% of season
6. Recruiting – 25-50% reductions in visits, allowable contacts and recruiting days
7. Probation – 6-10 years
That’s if the new punishment matrix applies.
I don’t think any coaches were specifically named, so no suspensions there. I think most implicated people are gone from UNC but they may get show cause orders preventing them from working at other schools. I’m not sure if recruiting punishments will be seen as applicable since this wasn’t a recruiting scandal.
I’d look for a big fine, some postseason bans and lost scholarships and a very lengthy probation.
LikeLike
UNC’s crimes strike at the heart of its academic raison d’etre. It is corruption of its academic programs. This is far more serious than the Penn State scandal, which was limited to a few people in the athletic department.
An SMU-style death penalty probably won’t happen, but it is deserved. There should also be vacating of all wins and titles. And the head coaches should be suspended.
Considering what happened to Tressle and Paterno, UNC has to be crushed. Otherwise, the corruption of the NCAA will be unbearable. FIFA West.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“UNC’s crimes strike at the heart of its academic raison d’etre. It is corruption of its academic programs.”
Agreed.
“This is far more serious than the Penn State scandal, which was limited to a few people in the athletic department.”
I’ll agree in terms of breadth, but I will never consider an academic scandal worse than child molestation in terms of victims.
“An SMU-style death penalty probably won’t happen, but it is deserved.”
I disagree. Killing the sports isn’t the remedy for a rogue academic department. That’s what accreditors are for. They should be the ones killing UNC.
“There should also be vacating of all wins and titles.”
I didn’t list those because they weren’t in the matrix, but it’s a given that vacating is an option. Possibly for any season with a player taking a tainted class.
“And the head coaches should be suspended.”
Remaining ones? I listed that as an option. Replacements since then? I’m not sure that will happen.
“Otherwise, the corruption of the NCAA will be unbearable.”
It isn’t NCAA corruption if they don’t have the ability to properly punish UNC.
LikeLike
> the Penn State scandal, which was limited to a few people in the athletic department
Nope, that’s not correct. In actuality, the Sandusky scandal had almost nothing to do with Penn State athletics, football, or Paterno, except that Sandusky was an ex-football coach and Paterno was overridden when he didn’t want Sandusky bringing youngsters into Lasch building. Apparently others did.
It isn’t well known yet (but it’s well documented 😉 that Paterno fired Sandusky after the 1999 football season (remember the three regular-season-ending defensive collapses by a defense that had Brown, Arrington, and Short?). For some strange reason some on the BoT were so concerned about Sandusky’s firing that they called a meeting with Paterno over it.
BoT members cared that much about the firing of an assistant football coach? Odd.
The latest FIFA goings-on are remarkably instructive (although not completely parallel). It wasn’t so long ago that Freeh also prepared a report for FIFA. Freeh’s accuracy has never been so hot, but his business model used to be quite lucrative.
Thank goodness for the FBI investigation. And thank goodness uninformed opinion isn’t the same as honest-to-goodness fact.
—
P.S. I wonder how much longer until some PSU BoT members find themselves in court for fiduciary breach?
LikeLike
Thank you Brian, even if you disagree. I always look forward to your comments, which are generally sane and informative.
LikeLike
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see UNC get hammered. Outside of actual crimes, this is the worst possible corruption in college athletics. I really think the feds and/or accreditors should lower the boom, though. I want to see the AD punished as well, but the problem is bigger than that.
With modern TV contracts, I believe the death penalty is all but abandoned. I’d love to see UNC get severe penalties in fines, vacated wins and titles and in other ways. I’m just not sure what punishments fit the crime. Probably scholarship reductions and penalties for all the HCs employed at the time. A lengthy postseason ban in hoops would hurt them as much or more than anything else. The NCAA limited itself to 10 years I believe, so I’d love to see the penalties stretch out just as long.
But my practical side knows the NCAA won’t hit them that hard, so there’s no point in getting my hopes up. I just hope they actually get some penalties, unlike Miami.
LikeLike
I’m hoping against big sanctions. This falls more under NCAA jurisdiction than the Penn State stuff did, but I’m still leaning somewhat against it being completely an NCAA issue. If non-athletes were in these classes, then the existence of the classes should lower UNC reputation (which should be a bigger issue than any NCAA issue), but this isn’t strictly an athletic issue.
LikeLike
Child rape is obviously far, far worse. But we have a criminal justice system that is quite capable of punishing that — and in fact, already has, with one case concluded (Sandusky himself) and several others pending. There are also civil damages, which Penn State has paid in boatloads. If the NCAA had done nothing, there would still have been plenty of consequences for the perpetrators—certainly enough to send a strong deterrence signal to anyone warped enough to attempt similar conduct in the future.
In contrast, giving athletes A’s for no-show courses doesn’t violate any law I have heard about. Rather, it’s a violation of fundamental sportsmanship, which is arguably the entire purpose for which the NCAA exists. The whole point of collegiate athletics is that the participants are both students and athletes. If some of the athletes aren’t in fact students (as that term is normally understood), then the competition is fundamentally unfair. And if the NCAA didn’t act, I am not sure who would.
So although Penn State was worse, North Carolina is far more relevant to the NCAA’s mission. No one ever said (before Penn State) that we need an NCAA to make sure coaches don’t rape children. But we clearly do need a regulatory body to make sure student-athletes really are students. That particular problem has occurred repeatedly in the history of collegiate athletics, and almost certainly would again if there were no consequences.
LikeLike
As an institution receiving government money to provide these classes, I think running fake classes may constitute fraud.
LikeLike
But small potatoes as far as that fraud goes … 1.2m students are enrolled at career colleges, and at least a quarter of those will be taking some or all of their coursework as phony classes. Its possibly more than half. I taught at one for years while it was in a slide from being a real career college to being a two year degree mill, and it was the best of the career colleges in the local area … and the entire financial purpose of the institutions is to cash student loan checks. So at least half of the students in career colleges in the area of Northeast Ohio I was living in were defrauding the Federal government, and for all I know it might be all of them by this time (that’s one reason I’m now teaching China, at a school that has a 20% cap on how many A’s you are allowed to award in any given class).
LikeLike
Oops, after reading that comment, this was a mis-statement: “So at least half of the students in career colleges in the area of Northeast Ohio I was living in were defrauding the Federal government, …”
That should be: “So at least half of the students in career colleges in the area of Northeast Ohio I was living in were being used as the means to defraud the Federal government, …”
LikeLike
This was done primarily for athletes. Non-athletes just happened to benefit. Allowing that as a defense just opens the door massively for abuse.
LikeLike
Here’s an interesting article, from an LSU perspective, on the digital component of the SEC Network.
http://theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/12562254-123/lsu-baseball-games-draw-more
“LSU’s conference baseball games this season averaged nearly 20,000 online viewers per game — tripling the league average of 6,572 for online-only SEC baseball games and leaving Kevin Wagner smiling.
“The SEC was blown away by this. It boggles the mind,” said Wagner, LSU’s assistant athletic director overseeing the school’s SEC Network productions. “Going into this, we all knew the (LSU baseball numbers) were going to be good. I don’t think anybody knew it was going to be that popular.”
The top five most-watched SEC digital events this year were LSU baseball games — including all three games of the Tigers’ series sweep at Alabama. The series finale against the Crimson Tide on April 4 drew 35,843 unique viewers — the most-watched event on SEC Network-Plus, the digital arm of the league’s new TV channel.”
“Cost is a key variable in expanding LSU’s SEC Network-Plus events, Wagner said.
It costs LSU $5,500 to produce each game, he said, and the network only covers $3,500 of that for the first 40 games. It pitches in just $1,500 for SEC Network-Plus games after the 40.
In total, LSU spent $280,000 in production costs on 60 games, and the network covered $149,000 of that.
“There is a considerable expense,” Wagner said. “(Athletic director) Joe (Alleva) and I need to sit down and say, ‘How do we want to spend this money?’ ”
LSU spent about $3.5 million last year in readying for the SEC Network, and the school will spend another $500,000 to $1 million on more upgrades this year, Wagner said.”
LikeLike
I’m glad to see LSU is willing to spend the money to produce the games. It’s a loss leader, but it makes a lot of their fans very happy I’m sure. With the revenue they have, it should be easily affordable.
LikeLike
Not sure I’d call it a lost leader, at least in LSU’s case. It is a requirement of espn. The return is the SECN payment espn makes to the conference. And I bet espn is making money off it. It is, however, another example of a hidden cost that isn’t displayed when just comparing conference distributions of different models and ownership arrangements.
LikeLike
Brian & cc – LSU really doesn’t have a choice when it comes to baseball. LSU baseball is the only sport in the SEC that now has less exposure due to the SECN. Prior to the SECN, almost all LSU baseball games were televised.
LikeLike
When did LSU baseball start getting so big? In the 80s, or even earlier?
LikeLike
Brian – it started in the mid-80s when Miami’s pitching coach Skip Bertman was hired as LSU’s head coach. Prior to Skip taking over the program, LSU had only made it to one NCAA regional. Here’s what the LSU baseball teams have accomplished over the last 31 years.
http://www.lsusports.net/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=27865&SPID=2173&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=5200&ATCLID=208165760
National Championships (6)
1991, ’93, ’96, ’97, 2000, ’09
College World Series Appearances (17)
1986, ’87, ’89, ’90, ’91, ’93, ’94, ’96, ’97, ’98, 2000, ’03, ’04, ’08, ’09, ’13, ’15
NCAA Super Regional Titles (7)
2000, ’03, ’04, ’08, ’09, ’13, 15
NCAA Super Regional Appearances (11)
1999, 2000, ’01, ’02, ’03, ’04, ’08, ’09, ’12, ’13, ’15
NCAA Regional Titles (21)
1986, ’87, ’89, ’90, ’91, ’93, ’94, ’96, ’97, ’98, ’99, 2000, ’01, ’02, ’03, ’04, ’08, ’09, ’12, ’13, ’15
NCAA Regional Appearances (28)
1975, ’85, ’86, ’87, ’89, ’90, ’91, ’92, ’93, ’94, ’95, ’96, ’97, ’98, ’99, 2000, ’01, ’02, ’03, ’04, ’05, ’08, ’09, ’10, ’12, ’13, ’14, ’15
LikeLike
According to the NBA’s twitter, Cleveland/GS is a hit.
The NBA Finals’ Game 1 drew its highest television rating since the series moved to ABC in 2003. The Warriors’ OT win averaged a 10.6 rating, and the nearly 17.8M viewers were up 21% from last year’s opener between the Spurs and Heat.
Too bad Kyrie Irving is now out for surgery, so Cleveland will lose in 5 probably (I think LBJ can steal one game at home).
LikeLike
We’ve all seen the occasional player who remained in, or didn’t ask out while limping noticeably. Or the bell rung kid who heads to the wrong huddle, but again remains in the game. The PAC seems to be trying to address some of this.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/pac-12-teams-injury-spotter-during-football-games-013111404–ncaaf.html
LikeLike
http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/college/sec-adds-independent-medical-observer-to-football-/nmPG4/
The SEC is doing this, too.
LikeLike
Good to see.
PAC also to sponsor sand volleyball. 😎
And seems to be moving on what SBJ wrote about in April.
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2015/04/06/Colleges/Pac12-rights.aspx?
LikeLike
Y’all are slow today. 30 second shot clock (and other changes) adopted.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2015/06/08/rules-changes-mens-basketball-shot-clock-timeouts/28697577/
LikeLike
The CWS is set. With wins by Fullerton & TCU last night, the Titans and the Frogs prevented the CWS from being an all ACC/SEC affair. The SEC did place four teams in the tournament (#2 LSU, #4 Florida, Vandy & Arkansas) and the ACC is sending two teams (#5 Miami and Virginia). Last year’s champ (Vandy) and runner up (Virginia) made it back. All the participating schools are CWS veterans, with LSU (6), Miami (4), Fullerton (4) and Vandy (1) winning past championships.
If my Tigers win it all, LSU will break its second place tie with Texas for most CWS titles. USC is first with 12 (11 of which were won in the pre-ESPN era).
LikeLike
Good luck. I’m not sure the CWS is good at actually picking the best team among the 8, but it’s usually entertaining.
LikeLike
Quite a few changes in the works for NCAA women’s basketball, most notably shifting to 10-minute quarters a la FIBA and the WNBA:
http://www.testudotimes.com/2015/6/9/8748827/ncaa-womens-basketball-rule-changes
LikeLike
There are some fairly dramatic consequences of this. The one-and-one will be eliminated. Starting with the fifth foul of a quarter, the fouled player will be awarded two shots.
They will also allow an offensive team to advance the ball to mid-court in the final minute of the 4th quarter or overtime, if they call an immediate time-out after a made basket, defensive rebound, or change of possession. This rule makes dramatic comebacks and buzzer-beaters easier to achieve, though I’m not fond of it. It gives the offense half the court “for free”, rather than forcing them to earn it.
Imagine if a football team on its own 10 yard line could call time-out, and come back with the ball at midfield?
LikeLike
I hate those advancing rules. It’s one of the dumbest things in the NBA. And why should the rules change for the final minute?
I don’t mind the switch to quarters. The 1-and-1 was always a little weird. I’d prefer to see teams get the option of shooting free throws or getting possession (reduces the effectiveness of late fouls).
LikeLike
Nebraska joined the Big Ten five years ago, the Omaha World-Herald takes a look back. Even mentions Frank.
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/a-look-back-at-how-nebraska-bucked-the-big-texas/article_2cc6f044-0fe1-11e5-b86b-335d8975719f.html
It’s generally agreed upon, for example, that the Big Ten has long adored Notre Dame the way Jay Gatsby reached out to the green light on Daisy Buchanan’s boat dock. In a Dec. 27, 2009 “Frank The Tank” blog post on conference realignment, Notre Dame and Texas are viewed as “the only real choices” for the Big Ten. Nebraska is a “contender” that scores lower than Syracuse.
LikeLike
SI retrospective on Dan Beebe’s role:
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/06/11/dan-beebe-conference-realignment-five-years-later
LikeLike
Nice long piece. It makes me want to play the what-if game.
Everyone’s been doing 5 year anniversary stories.
http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/texas-longhorns-aggies-missouri-tigers-sec-big-12-pac-12-realignment-chaos-061115
Stewart Mandel for Fox names the 5 biggest winners and losers, although many people disagree with some of his choices (esp. for losers).
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/06/11/dan-beebe-conference-realignment-five-years-later
Andy Staples at SI focused on Dan Beebe’s role in things and does a great recap from the B12 perspective.
LikeLike
Expansion What Ifs (in roughly temporal order, 3-6 were almost simultaneous):
1. The B10 didn’t make their announcement in 12/2009 but just went quietly about their business of looking into potential candidates?
2. The B10 acted in the spring of 2010 instead of waiting until June (when the B12 conference meeting started)?
3. The P-16 rumor never got started?
4. The P-16 actually happened (maybe with someone else instead of TAMU)?
5. Texas decided for a B12N instead of the LHN?
6. The B10 took MO at the same time as NE?
LikeLike
4. Scott visited Kansas when A&M indicated they weren’t interested. Utah would have been out of luck. Presumably Missouri and A&M would have still ended up in the SEC. Baylor, Kansas St. and Iowa St. would be left scrambling.
LikeLike
This was the next year, but…
7. The ACC didn’t invite Pitt and Syracuse in Sept. ’11? (Caught everyone off guard while they were focusing on Texas A&M’s interests in SEC and rumors about UT/TT/OU/OSU going to the Pac-16 were being discussed.)
a) What if it was Syracuse and UConn? Or Pitt and West Virginia, instead?
b) What if no one was invited at all?
8. What if the Big 12 had signed that grant of rights in ’08, as the Andy Staples article discusses?
LikeLike
Fox has a list of the five biggest winners and losers.
Winners:
1. Rutgers
2. TCU
3. Utah
4. Texas A&M / Missouri
5. Louisville
Losers:
1. Cincinnati / UConn
2. BYU
3. West Virginia
4. Idaho and New Mexico State
5. Boise State
LikeLike
The Boise State as realignment loser meme is laughable.
They have virtually no shot at a P5 in the next decade or two, their odds aren’t much better than Arkansas State. More people live within a two hour drive of AState than Boise and about 5x more FBS are in the surrounding area. More P5 leagues are nearby. AState isn’t going P5.
Boise won in realignment because access no longer is conditional and three tough contenders for access are out of the pool, Utah, TCU and BYU.
LikeLike
On the other hand, Cincinnati, which also had its own undefeated season in ’09, is now among Boise’s competitors for that access spot, as are schools who are much improved like UCF.
LikeLike
Which still leaves them a net winner, from the shot at the unconditional big bowl if they win their conference. The only way to paint them as a loser is to focus on the threading the needle scenario where the Big East is still desperate enough to take Boise FB-only but OTOH are still strong enough to be given an automatic spot in a big bowl … which to my mind is saying that there is a very unlikely but perhaps-maybe-not-impossible scenario in which they would have been big winners instead of moderate winners from realignment.
LikeLike
The argument for Cincinnati as a “loser”, is that they were among the last small handful of schools who had a plausible shot at a P5 bid, but didn’t get one.
But I think UConn deserves #1 all to itself. They were inches away from an ACC offer, which at the last minute went to Louisville. The trouble for UConn is that they’re hemmed in by geography. The ACC was the only P5 conference likely to offer, and with the ACC at 15, any further expansion is off the table, barring further re-alignment dominoes, a scenario that must be at least a decade away.
In contrast, Cincinnati still remains a possibility for the Big XII. They could conceivably get an offer without any other moves having to occur.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/13058773/academic-fraud-nets-north-carolina-tar-heels-1-year-probation-accreditation-agency-says
This is what upsets me. UNC’s accreditation agency gives them a whopping 1 year of probation. This is the group that should have hammered UNC.
At a meeting in Portsmouth, Virginia, the group determined that UNC failed to comply with seven key operating principals for member universities, among them: integrity, program content, control of intercollegiate athletics and academic support services. The practical effect of the sanction is that “they just have to send us more documentation to show their compliance with seven of these principals,” commission President Belle Wheelan said.
…
Regional accrediting agencies placed 21 schools on probation and withdrew accreditation for 17 others around the country in 2014 and the first three months of this year, according to figures compiled by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
What did those 17 schools do that was worse than UNC having a fake department for over a decade?
LikeLike
The weakness in the system is the penalty structure. Basically it’s three options as I understand letter of caution, one year probation or withdraw accreditation.
LikeLike
What did those 17 schools do that was worse than UNC having a fake department for over a decade?
The accreditation agency is not specifically focused on athletics. While these infractions are obviously serious, they were fairly limited in scope. UNC must have scores of departments, dozens of degree programs, and tens of thousands of students who came nowhere near the one rogue department that it had.
Outside of that department, no one has suggested that UNC was anything other than a very serious and demanding university. Anything the accreditation group would do, beyond what it has done, would devastate the whole institution for the actions of very few. That is not a very effective punishment.
When the NCAA punishes schools, it punishes only the athletics program, the place where the infractions have occurred. It has no direct effect on regular students or faculty, other than perhaps wounded school pride. That is how it should be.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“The accreditation agency is not specifically focused on athletics.”
I’m aware of that.
“While these infractions are obviously serious, they were fairly limited in scope.”
In that it was just one department as far as we know, sure. But it went on for a very long time and they got cited for a lack of oversight among other issues. How did no other faculty in that department notice anything? How did nobody report this up the ladder? How many other problems may have been missed because nobody was checking into things at UNC?
“UNC must have scores of departments, dozens of degree programs, and tens of thousands of students who came nowhere near the one rogue department that it had.”
http://admissions.unc.edu/explore/academics/majors-minors-and-concentrations/
All told, we offer more than 70 majors and minors within 60 departments.
and
http://www.unc.edu/academics/
Carolina offers 78 bachelor’s … through its 14 schools and the College of Arts and Sciences.
AFAM was a department, so less than 2% of all departments were involved. Still, they found at least 3100 students had taken bogus classes. That’s a pretty big issue.
“Outside of that department, no one has suggested that UNC was anything other than a very serious and demanding university.”
Of course, but we don’t know that they haven’t missed other problems. How deeply did anyone look at the other popular classes for athletes? What about for other students? Did the whole Social Studies area get scrutinized?
“Anything the accreditation group would do, beyond what it has done, would devastate the whole institution for the actions of very few. That is not a very effective punishment.”
I disagree. It’d be highly effective, just not targeted. And that’s how large organizations get punished, generally (large fines, lost status, etc).
“When the NCAA punishes schools, it punishes only the athletics program, the place where the infractions have occurred. It has no direct effect on regular students or faculty, other than perhaps wounded school pride.”
But here the academic violations occurred outside of the AD and involved over 1500 regular students and several faculty or staff members. The NCAA punishes athletic violations, so they stick to the AD.
I’d agree that it would be better if accreditors had a wider range of penalty options (fines, ability to target a department or even a college, etc).
LikeLike
I have a hard time arguing with you, Brian, about UNC. I certainly respect your opinion. Hearing everything that has happened there, I’ve asked myself, “If that doesn’t cost a school its accreditation, what does?”
You ask good questions. Perhaps the accreditation agency should demand more investigations into other academic departments.
I strongly agree UNC needs to be punished, but taking away accreditation would devastate the entire institution, including almost entirely people who have done absolutely nothing wrong. It makes me wonder how this would harm the medical school, hospitals, etc. Julius Nyang’oro and Deborah Crowder can’t be punished, other than the loss of their reputations, because the state granted them immunity in exchange for cooperating with Wainstein’s report. They’re most deserving of punishment. Academic advisors who were involved are all fired. The chancellor has been replaced. There’s a new athletic director and head football coach. UNC has already cleaned house and, supposedly, taken measures to have necessary oversight that they should have had all along.
My point is that the people who would be punished would by losing accreditation would be many more than football players not getting a scholarship or going to a bowl game. Everyone at UNC would be ineligible for federal financial aid. We’re talking thousands of students, not just a sports team. Degrees and credits earned at a non-accredited school could not be recognized by other institutions when those students apply to transfer or go to graduate school. It could siderail faculty’s careers. It could take UNC decades to recover from that. What good does that do?
I think the most approrpriate punishment would be heavy fines and frequent auditing by the accreditation agency. Holding the current people accountable to make sure they’re doing things right seems perfectly justifiable. Give them extra work to prove that UNC’s house is in order, even held to a higher standard than other universities which are accredited by the agency, but don’t make them have to suffer for the sins of their predecessors.
LikeLike
Michael in Raleigh,
“I have a hard time arguing with you, Brian, about UNC. I certainly respect your opinion. Hearing everything that has happened there, I’ve asked myself, “If that doesn’t cost a school its accreditation, what does?””
I would like to know exactly how much it takes to cross that line. What if it was 5 departments at UNC instead of just 1? What if a whole college at a university had these issues?
I looked around SACSCOC’s website a little and it looks like a well funded school can get away with almost anything, they just have to implement a plan to quickly fix the issues once they are pointed out. The point is to fix the schools, not close them down. Unfortunately, they really don’t have a punishment structure at all. It’s just warnings, probation or the death penalty. That seems like a bad plan to me.
“You ask good questions. Perhaps the accreditation agency should demand more investigations into other academic departments.”
Especially since they rely on the school to investigate itself and send them the results for review.
“I strongly agree UNC needs to be punished, but taking away accreditation would devastate the entire institution, including almost entirely people who have done absolutely nothing wrong.”
For a prolonged period, yes. I was hoping for a symbolic loss of accreditation, for a day or a week or something. Just enough that UNC would have to be labelled as having lost their accreditation at some point, but not enough to punish current students.
“I think the most approrpriate punishment would be heavy fines and frequent auditing by the accreditation agency. Holding the current people accountable to make sure they’re doing things right seems perfectly justifiable. Give them extra work to prove that UNC’s house is in order, even held to a higher standard than other universities which are accredited by the agency, but don’t make them have to suffer for the sins of their predecessors.”
Apparently only the NCAA has the ability to fine them, and that doesn’t punish the academic side at all.
LikeLike
One year probation sounds pretty light.
LikeLike
This is why they need more tools. Loss of accreditation is a nuclear option. Overnight hundreds if not thousands unemployed, thousands or tens of thousands of displaced college students with uncertainty over the transfer of credits, research stopped mid-study.
Demand another body take oversight, if athletic related impose sanctions, bring in third party control, limit the budget but you don’t nuke a large four year school if it can be avoided.
LikeLike
“Outside of that department, no one has suggested that UNC was anything other than a very serious and demanding university.”
Of course, but we don’t know that they haven’t missed other problems. How deeply did anyone look at the other popular classes for athletes? What about for other students? Did the whole Social Studies area get scrutinized?
You’re right to suggest that they ought to look more broadly. On the other hand, your comment reminds me of certain football fans, who say, “When are they going to give the whole SEC the death penalty? Because we all know they’re still cheating, just like they always did.”
For the purposes of the current conversation, I am assuming the violations are the ones we know. Obviously, if more were discovered, it would be a different conversation. I am guessing the accreditation agency has limited resources (and authority) to send a team to Chapel Hill for a fishing expedition. In that sense, they’re probably a lot like the NCAA. They can’t just poke around, without anything concrete to go on.
“Anything the accreditation group would do, beyond what it has done, would devastate the whole institution for the actions of very few. That is not a very effective punishment.”
I disagree. It’d be highly effective, just not targeted. And that’s how large organizations get punished, generally (large fines, lost status, etc).
You’re right: targeted would’ve been a better word choice. But I wonder what precedents your word “generally” purports to cover? And even if you could name a few, does that make it right?
Here’s one precedent I recall: Arthur Andersen. The entire company was put out of business, when they were convicted of violating Federal law, due to “wrongdoing” by a small number of people. This means innocent people out of jobs, personal bankruptcies, lost homes, children uprooted. The punch line? Andersen’s conviction was overturned on appeal. Under the law, they’d done nothing wrong. Of course, by then the firm was dead and could not be re-started. Their victory on appeal was fairly hollow.
Now, I don’t think UNC has been falsely accused, since they’ve admitted the infraction. But when your philosophy of punishment teaches that it’s acceptable to ruin the lives of large numbers of people you know are innocent, due to the actions of a few, then you are accepting that you will make such mistakes. I don’t find that acceptable.
If that doesn’t cost a school its accreditation, what does?
It doesn’t seem to happen often. In the cases I could find, the problems were pervasive. The whole institution, or at least a substantial part of it, had failed. To de-accredit a school due to one rogue department out of 60 (and I am guessing a far smaller-than-average department) would be unprecedented.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“You’re right to suggest that they ought to look more broadly. On the other hand, your comment reminds me of certain football fans, who say, “When are they going to give the whole SEC the death penalty? Because we all know they’re still cheating, just like they always did.””
The main reason I ask is because SACSCOC doesn’t investigate on its own. It asks questions and counts on the reply from the school. It took multiple investigations at UNC just to uncover all these problems with AFAM. It makes me wonder what else a deeper investigation might find. Quite possibly the answer is nothing, but it make me curious.
“For the purposes of the current conversation, I am assuming the violations are the ones we know. Obviously, if more were discovered, it would be a different conversation.”
Yes, and I was trying to ask hypothetically about that potential conversation.
“I am guessing the accreditation agency has limited resources (and authority) to send a team to Chapel Hill for a fishing expedition.”
They literally only review paperwork submitted by the school. Nobody goes to the school to investigate.
“You’re right: targeted would’ve been a better word choice. But I wonder what precedents your word “generally” purports to cover?”
I was merely describing the typical penalties when the government busts a company for something – fines and maybe lost status.
“And even if you could name a few, does that make it right?”
No, but there may be no better alternative either. Few punishments are truly right.
“Here’s one precedent I recall: Arthur Andersen. The entire company was put out of business, when they were convicted of violating Federal law, due to “wrongdoing” by a small number of people. This means innocent people out of jobs, personal bankruptcies, lost homes, children uprooted. The punch line? Andersen’s conviction was overturned on appeal. Under the law, they’d done nothing wrong.”
I’d rephrase that as AA wasn’t proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have broken the law. I’d almost guarantee an omniscient investigation of AA would’ve uncovered something illegal. Once a fleet of lawyers gets involved to hinder investigations and muddy the waters, convictions can be hard to obtain.
“Now, I don’t think UNC has been falsely accused, since they’ve admitted the infraction. But when your philosophy of punishment teaches that it’s acceptable to ruin the lives of large numbers of people you know are innocent, due to the actions of a few, then you are accepting that you will make such mistakes. I don’t find that acceptable.”
1. Ruining their lives is overly dramatic. They might have to find new jobs. It’s not the apocalypse.
2. How many of those “innocent” people turned a blind eye over the years to what the AD was doing? How many had suspicions about grades for athletes but kept quiet because they didn’t want to tarnish Dean’s legacy?
“It doesn’t seem to happen often. In the cases I could find, the problems were pervasive. The whole institution, or at least a substantial part of it, had failed. To de-accredit a school due to one rogue department out of 60 (and I am guessing a far smaller-than-average department) would be unprecedented.”
I was honestly asking what the bar is. As I said, I was hoping for a symbolic stripping of UNC’s accreditation (just for a day). I didn’t want or expect it to be gone for a year or more.
LikeLike
At AA, the people at the top understood what was going on at Enron. It may have been a small number of people, but it was the key partners. And it was the core of their business, their purpose for existing, auditing (they thought their purpose was to make money on consulting).
That is a contrast to UNC where, so far as we know, the top people at UNC have been involved in trying to downplay the fraud and intimidate witnesses, but didn’t know about it when it was happening. Or at Penn St. where the top people knew, but it wasn’t faculty attacking students (teaching students-their core purpose-the cynical would say they thought their purpose was winning football games).
LikeLike
“This is what upsets me. UNC’s accreditation agency gives them a whopping 1 year of probation. This is the group that should have hammered UNC.”
Except it is a punishment that will sting quite a bit. One thing about accreditation probation is that its not just a year of unpaid extra work for academic staff, its also a year of unpaid extra work for university administrators, and after going through the process, there will be a lot of scrutiny inside the University as to what the AD is up to that would not otherwise have been present.
And of course, while nobody expects UNC to be placed on probation AGAIN … they have been put on the first step to losing accreditation, since the schools that lost accreditation would have been schools that had been placed on probation multiple times previously.
Among the vain, status-conscious academic snobs that a school like UNC attracts, being placed on probation hurts worse than any sanction that the NCAA can impose.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/06/11/ncaa-congress-college-athletics-scholarships-concussion-dent-beatty-rush-katko/71077994/
Some Congressmen want to stick their nose into college athletics.
LikeLike
Expansion news – NJIT to the Atlantic Sun.
LikeLike
John Malone, chairman of Liberty Media (owner of the Braves) was quoted in the Atlanta paper as saying in a stockholder’s meeting that he thought that cable bundling would come apart and that he would be concerned if he had a 20 or 30 year escalating sports media deal.
So basically he’s saying what I’ve said that technology will eventually break apart the current model which makes conference networks and ESPN enormously profitable.
LikeLike
All models die eventually, but something else replaces them. A company like Disney will find a way to keep making a ton of money on ESPN.
Even if some/most bundling goes away, the conference networks may still be bundled in some way. If they can’t make the whole footprint pay, then they’ll jack up the price per household now that people are used to it and more quality games are on it.
If/when everything goes to streaming, they’ll make a ton off of that, too.
The technology changes, but the rich tend to stay rich.
LikeLike
And when the media model changes-conference realignment happens.
The end of the NCAA monopoly resulted is lower TV rights for sports in the 80s which led to the mass realignment starting with Arkansas and Penn St. moving.
The discovery of the conference network led to the Pac, B1G and SEC expansions starting with Nebraska and Colorado.
LikeLike
bullet,
“And when the media model changes-conference realignment happens.”
Maybe, maybe not. If the model changes so there is a new way to make a lot of money through realignment, then yes. I’m not sure it’s true if the media model shrinks the pie. Would P5 conferences kick out current members if the reason they added them no longer applies?
“The discovery of the conference network led to the Pac, B1G and SEC expansions starting with Nebraska and Colorado.”
I disagree. The CCG was a bigger driver for the early moves. The networks mattered more for phase 2, the growth to 14.
LikeLike
The Pac 12 was really focused on its network. Maybe the B1G was focused more on the ccg.
Parts of the P5 would leave their current conferences if they no longer made sense. Its happened many times before. The Big 8 (6 at the time) leaving the MVC, SEC leaving the Southern Conference, the ACC leaving the Southern Conference, The Pac 5 leaving its predecessor, the Texas 4 leaving the SWC, the MWC leaving the WAC, the BE privates leaving the BE, most of CUSA heading to the AAC, most of the Sun Belt heading to the CUSA.
In fact, the Big 10, MAC and Sun Belt are the only football conferences out there that aren’t formed largely from a secession from another conference.
LikeLike
Again, the “pac5” resulted from the supposed left outs dissolving the conference. I guess you could say the 5 got booted. Indy was much more viable at that time. And they were back together (minus Idaho, who had immediately become a founding member of another conference) in the Pac8 in less time than has passed since the recent conference Armageddon phase started.
I could not envision a case for any of them leaving, even with a B1G invite.
LikeLike
bullet,
“The Pac 12 was really focused on its network. Maybe the B1G was focused more on the ccg.”
The P10 wanted a network but they also needed to hit 12+. That growth was good for both the CCG and the network side. But without the CCG rule, would they have added Utah? It was already a P10 state for broadcast purposes.
“Parts of the P5 would leave their current conferences if they no longer made sense.”
Who and to go where? GoRs tie all but the SEC for a while. And why leave unless there’s a better destination? Who would pick up WV (the most obvious candidate to leave)?
That’s why I specifically asked if the P5 would kick anybody out. I think most would agree the B10 wouldn’t kick out anyone. Could the B12 or ACC afford to boot anyone? Would the SEC want to lose footprint?
Or do you think the B10, ACC and SEC would recombine into 4 conferences or something?
LikeLike
I don’t expect them to kick anyone out, but some might leave much like the MWC schools left the WAC.
You might have a national superconference, say USC, UCLA, Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina (can’t forget bb), Ohio St., Michigan, Notre Dame, Nebraska.
Or you might have some of the ACC and eastern SEC schools form a new group. Or a best of Pac/Big 12s conference.
LikeLike
““Parts of the P5 would leave their current conferences if they no longer made sense.”
Who and to go where? GoRs tie all but the SEC for a while.”
the shape that the new media commercial landscape is still murky … there are of course “visionaries” who can tell you exactly how it will be, but since different visionaries are peddling different visions, that is not a strong enough basis to justify making billion dollar moves that put hundreds of millions to billions of dollars of brand equity at stake.
But the end of the current GOR’s ought to be enough time for the opportunities as well as dead ends in the new media revenue landscape to be clear, so that is a more plausible time for major realignment to kick in.
Its not automatically the case that that it will involve further consolidation and nationalization of college sports … that’s more a projection of the status quo system, and the one prediction we can be confident about is that the status quo system will have waned in importance by that time.
LikeLike
I’m talking about after the end of the current round of contracts, which ends about 2034 with the SEC ESPN extension. That should be plenty of time for a lot of change in media. But it could be in the mid-2020s when the Pac 12, Big 12 and SEC CBS deal end.
LikeLike
Yes, if by 2020 there looks like there is a gold rush opportunity, then there will be a gold rush. If not, by the time that the mid-30’s rolls around, it will be clear what directions to move to maximize value … whether that means increasing value or it means minimizing a slide in value.
LikeLike
Thought this read like a propaganda piece at the time. You have to take anything out of the ACC office with a grain of salt. http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11044060/acc-distributed-record-2917-million-total-revenue-2013-14-fiscal-year
Article says in 2013-14 they distributed 291.7 million or $20.8 million per school. Teel’s tweets linked by Frank say 90.7% of 302.3 million was distributed. He apparently has the ACC tax return. He also lists all the distributions but NCSU. They range from $17.9 million to $21.3 not counting ND’s $4.9. Backing into NCSU gives you a figure of $18.1 million. That also comes out to an average of $19.2 million per full member, not $20.8. The article above would imply that $19.6 was distributed in 2012-13 per school, but that has to questioned as well (291.7-56.6 divided 12 ways).
Teel also gives $197 million as TV money, or slightly less than $14 million/school.
LikeLike
bullet,
“Article says in 2013-14 they distributed 291.7 million or $20.8 million per school. Teel’s tweets linked by Frank say 90.7% of 302.3 million was distributed. He apparently has the ACC tax return. He also lists all the distributions but NCSU. They range from $17.9 million to $21.3 not counting ND’s $4.9. Backing into NCSU gives you a figure of $18.1 million. That also comes out to an average of $19.2 million per full member, not $20.8.”
The writer did $291.7M/14 to get $20.8M is my guess. Probably either the ACC keeps a share that she didn’t account for initially or there are some accounting differences in terms of expenses that the ACC counterbalances by not distributing all the money (bowl costs, etc).
LikeLike
Yes, but this was a “leak” from the ACC who doesn’t release this information. It took a year before the tax returns came out and the actual figures were released.
LikeLike
But you don’t know which parts of that article were straight from the “leak” and which were interpretation by the writer. Maybe the leak said 291.7M but the rest is math by the writer.
And maybe that 291.7 was correct at the time. The fiscal year only ended 6 days before the article, so maybe not all the numbers were truly final yet. Or maybe the leak included the ACC giving itself a share. Or maybe the leak included UMD’s share, but the final tax numbers don’t because they kept that money due to the lawsuit. The difference is $17.5M.
LikeLike
The comparative average distributions for 2013-14
Big 12 $22.0 (tier III individual)
SEC $20.9 (tier III individual)
ACC $19.2 (tier III pooled)
For 2014-15 disclosed so far
SEC $31.2 (tier III pooled)
Big 12 $25.2 (tier III individual)
LikeLike
Don’t remember if this article has been linked on here before, but here are the Big 10 projected figures. http://www.jconline.com/story/sports/college/purdue/football/2014/04/25/big-ten-schools-expecting-big-payouts-continue/8187133/
$27 was what they were expecting in 2013-14 except for Nebraska who has a reduced payout. They expected it to jump to $44.5 (a $10 million increase in TV revenue with the new contract) in 2017 for the 12 schools other than Maryland and Rutgers.
LikeLike
The Washington Post reviews Maryland’s first year in the ACC, one that resulted in five full or partial conference championships: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/for-maryland-athletics-a-big-first-year-in-the-big-ten/2015/06/12/20db2680-0f17-11e5-9726-49d6fa26a8c6_story.html
LikeLike
Oopsie – I meant Maryland’s first year in the Big Ten. (Me, of all people, writing that.)
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/06/12/collegiate-commissioners-association-early-signing-period-vote
The conference commissioners will vote next week on the early signing period. If approved, it’ll be 3 days in mid-December for a 2-year trial period.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13098284/fbs-commissioners-table-early-signing-period-proposal
They tabled the proposal until next year. The goal is to let the football oversight committee take a bigger picture look at all issue related to recruiting (oversigning, grayshirting, early signing, satellite camps, etc) and suggest changes all at once rather than piecemeal.
LikeLike
The men’s NCAA track meet is over and Oregon won the NC. The women wrap up today.
http://www.ncaa.com/2015-division-i-mens-and-womens-track-and-field-championship
Top ten finishes:
1. Oregon
2. Florida
3. Arkansas
4. LSU
5. USCw
6. A&M
7. Texas
8. Miss State
9. Texas Tech
T-10. Illinois
T-10. Penn Sate
After today, all that’s left is the CWS.
LikeLike
Oregon’s women win the NCAAs as well.
http://www.ncaa.com/2015-division-i-mens-and-womens-track-and-field-championship
Here’s the top 11
1. Oregon
2. Kentucky
3. A&M
4. Arkansas
5. Georgia
6. Florida State
7. USCw
8. Florida
T-9. K-State
T-9. Texas
11. LSU
LikeLike
For the sake of discussion, which non-“king” B1G football program do people think is capable of making a Michigan State type jump in the near future?
Under Dantonio, MSU’s rise to national power is undeniable. 11 wins in the past four out of five seasons, B1G title, back to back top 5 finishes, four straight bowl victories including Rose Bowl and Cotton Bowl championships, and most importantly what looks to be its highest rated recruiting class ever (currently the #6 class in the country per 247Sports). The Spartans are also poised for another run at the CFB Playoff this year. All this has come from a program that has been average for most of the past 40 years.
There are plenty of B1G football teams will similar profiles. Wisconsin was historically a joke but under Alvarez made a similar jump in the 90s. But despite multiple Rose Bowl victories, his teams never really made it to the next level. Bielema built on Alvarez’s success and took UW on a run recently, but still UW never quite made it over the hump, losing back to back Rose Bowls and never boosting its recruiting profile (perhaps by choice). Iowa made a run under Ferentz in the early 2000s, and from what I remember, made some recruiting noise as well, but he wasn’t able to sustain it and the Hawkeyes are now firmly back to being average.
I think there are three programs capable of making a Michigan State type jump: Maryland, Rutgers, and Illinois. Not saying it will happen since Michigan State had some big advantages over all three (fan and institutional support, big stadium/good game day atmosphere, great coach), but I think each is capable, given the right coach and proper investment.
Both Maryland and Rutgers are in fertile recruiting areas and neither has to fend off an instate rival for instate talent. If they can get half of that talent (a BIG if) they will field a talented team. To give you an idea of how fertile Maryland (including DC) and NJ are, per 247 they rank 2nd and 3rd within the B1G footprint in terms of producing players with stars. Looking solely at players ranked 3 star and above, Ohio has 11 four stars and 58 three stars for a total of 69 stars. DC/MD has 15 four stars and 30 three stars for a total of 45 stars. (I didn’t include Northern VA in my analysis, but with it the DMV area would rival Ohio for 1st, leading me to believe that UVA is probably the next expansion target for the B1G to further lockdown the DMV area, but that’s for another post). NJ has 2 five stars, 6 four stars, and 35 three stars for a total of 43 stars. Michigan and Pennsylvania are tied for fourth with 42 total stars, MI has 9 four stars, PA has 8, MI has 33 three stars, PA has 34. The only problem facing Maryland and Rutgers is that in order to make the jump, they will have to consistently beat the big 4 in the East. Even if MSU is unable to sustain its current success, at a minimum UMD and RU will have to face three schools each year that will consistently field more talented teams.
Illinois isn’t the greatest state for high school football talent, but it still produces a decent amount: 7 four stars and 26 3 stars for 33 total stars, good for 5th in the B1G (still almost more than Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska combined). While Northwestern is a challenger in state if the Illini can simply get half of that talent, they will field one the most talented teams in the West. Unlike UMD and RU, the Illini won’t have to go through the East. At the same time, the bulk of Illinois’ high school football talent is in Chicagoland and the St. Louis suburbs, neither of which are exactly close to Urbana-Champaign.
LikeLike
Maryland is closest, and I think it will happen for them. Rutgers and Illinois seem iffy to me, but their climb to the king, or at least prince level, is possible based on recruiting potential. But they have to hire coaches and coaching staffs that can recruit and then coach.
I would think about adding Purdue. Currently, they are at the princess level, but that seems to be by choice, a deliberate choice to deemphasize sports in order to elevate academic reputation. But Purdue has a distinguished football history, more so than the three you nominate, especially in quarterback production. Also, there was a recent meeting between former greats like Brees and the Purdue administration, including the Purdue President, AD and head coach. A generation and a half ago, the Boilermakers were legitimate national champion contenders.
LikeLike
For the sake of discussion, which non-“king” B1G football program do people think is capable of making a Michigan State type jump in the near future? . . . I think there are three programs capable of making a Michigan State type jump: Maryland, Rutgers, and Illinois.
It has to be a Western division school. The east already has the league’s two best programs (OSU, MSU), plus two dormant kings (UM, PSU). History teaches that kings generally revert to their old form, given enough time. They have structural advantages that scandal (in PSU’s case) or coach/AD incompetence (in UM’s case) cannot fully erase. Put the scandal behind you (as PSU has done), or hire leaders with a clue (as UM has done), and a return to contention is fairly likely.
Maryland and Rutgers are not likely to overcome all that competition. I mean, maybe there’ll be a miracle year when the three kings plus MSU are all down, and the Terps win a once-in-a-generation championship. To compete consistently at that level, is unlikely. Even MSU, with no disrespect to Mark Dantonio, probably couldn’t have achieved what it did without Michigan being down.
Among Western teams, Wisconsin seems to be the best candidate, because even now, they’re not all that far away. They seem to have been plagued by a series of near-misses, but I’d rather be playing their hand than anyone else’s. I have zero faith that Iowa can ever be great, as long as Ferentz is there, and it’s not clear how Purdue could ever get out of its funk. I do remember when Illinois used to be good, and Jerry Kill is starting to build a winner at Minnesota.
So there are your three possibilities: Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota.
LikeLike
Ten years ago, I’d have said Purdue. They weren’t far removed from Drew Brees’s Rose Bowl run. They had three straight quarterbacks go to the NFL (Brees, Kyle Orton, Curtis Painter). They were as good as any Big Ten team outside of what used to be the “big three” of Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State.
Since then, they’ve fizzled so much that today’s college students hardly have any memory at all of Purdue ever being any better than 7-6.
LikeLike
I left out Purdue when I mentioned Wisconsin and Iowa as having periods of high level success. Under Tiller the Boilermakers were close to making that leap but Tiller fell off toward the end and then they made terrible coaching hires after him that totally lost their momentum. I also think that part of Tiller’s success there came from being one of the first power 5 teams to run a spread offense, something that Purdue can’t use to its advantage anymore.
LikeLike
Tom,
“For the sake of discussion, which non-“king” B1G football program do people think is capable of making a Michigan State type jump in the near future?
Under Dantonio, MSU’s rise to national power is undeniable.”
It all depends how one defines national power, I think.
“11 wins in the past four out of five seasons,”
MSU is #8 in total W% of that period, #12 in total AP poll points.
“B1G title,”
That doesn’t mean much to many people with the B10 being down lately. WI won one with a 4-4 B10 record before the CCG in 2012.
“back to back top 5 finishes,”
2 years does not make a national power. MSU was unranked the year before that.
“four straight bowl victories including Rose Bowl and Cotton Bowl championships,”
Winning NY6 bowls is nice, but many people feel like Baylor blew their lead rather than MSU winning. And people haven’t forgotten the beat down from AL in the Cap 1 Bowl the year before this winning streak.
“and most importantly what looks to be its highest rated recruiting class ever (currently the #6 class in the country per 247Sports).”
Recruiting rankings in June mean nothing. It’s nice that MSU is doing better, but the rankings mean nothing until the kids all put pen to paper and everyone has a full class. Even then, you never know which players will pan out.
“The Spartans are also poised for another run at the CFB Playoff this year.”
Did they really make one last year? It was over after the OSU game and I don’t think anyone was giving them a real shot even if they did beat OSU. AL, OR and FSU would’ve gotten in and then a B12 team most likely. It would’ve taken a huge win like OSU had in the CCG to have a chance.
“All this has come from a program that has been average for most of the past 40 years.”
True.
“There are plenty of B1G football teams will similar profiles. Wisconsin was historically a joke but under Alvarez made a similar jump in the 90s. But despite multiple Rose Bowl victories, his teams never really made it to the next level. Bielema built on Alvarez’s success and took UW on a run recently, but still UW never quite made it over the hump, losing back to back Rose Bowls and never boosting its recruiting profile (perhaps by choice). Iowa made a run under Ferentz in the early 2000s, and from what I remember, made some recruiting noise as well, but he wasn’t able to sustain it and the Hawkeyes are now firmly back to being average.”
So when WI won back to back Rose Bowls and had back to back top 5 finishes wasn’t as impressive as MSU doing the exact same thing (substitute 1 Cotton for 1 Rose)? I agree WI never quite made it over the hump, but I don’t think MSU has either in the national view.
“I think there are three programs capable of making a Michigan State type jump: Maryland, Rutgers, and Illinois.”
1. I’d obviously put WI as the top choice. They’re close to the same level as MSU if not there.
2. None of those 3 schools is likely to me.
3. I think you put way too much emphasis on recruiting rankings. You need the coach before the talent matters.
LikeLike
I agree that WI has been on the cusp, but I think MSU’s recent run has been more impressive.
Baylor made some mistakes, but at the end of the day MSU won the game. WI had similar chances to pull out victories against TCU and Oregon but lost both times. And the B1G may not have had the best perception, but MSU did beat Stanford, which was the Pac 12’s best team that year (the Pac 12 was perceived to be at worst the second best conference) and before that beat an OSU team bound for the NC game. WI’s wins in the Rose Bowl during the 90s are also impressive but they weren’t able to sustain it and fell back to being average during the 2000s until Bielema took over.
Recruiting isn’t everything but it does matter. The teams that are elite and contend for NCs generally have the most talent. MSU’s past three classes (2013, 2014, 2015) were ranked 36, 25, and 22. Yeah, I don’t expect MSU to finish with the #6 class in the country this year but it will certainly be in the top 15 come signing day. Bottom line is that they have more talent on the roster now compared to when Dantonio took over. That’s going to help them sustain success. During Bielema’s height at WI (2009-2011 when he went a combined 32-8 and went to two Rose Bowls) his classes ranked 44, 45, and 39. The talent level basically stayed the same despite the success on the field. WI should be able to rack up wins in the West, but in the B1G title game or beyond, WI will be at a talent disadvantage and coaching can only get you so far as the B1G’s NC drought in basketball has shown.
“MSU poised for ANOTHER run at the playoff” is poor word choice. You’re right, they weren’t seriously in the mix last year but I think they beat Oregon at home this year in a match up of top 10 teams, vaulting them into the top 5. Then it comes down to beating OSU for a playoff bid since MSU will be favorites over everyone else with its two toughest opponents aside from OSU and Oregon undergoing coaching transitions.
LikeLike
Recruiting isn’t everything but it does matter.
Your points are somewhat contradictory. If recruiting matters, then MSU’s past three classes (36th, 25th, 22nd) would have them poised for roughly a top-25ish finish — better than their pre-Dantonio level, but well below elite. Yet, you cite Wisconsin, which has consistently performed far better than its recruiting rankings would predict.
Personally, I think you had it right the first time. Consistent performance way above one’s recruiting rankings is seldom achieved. Wisconsin is an outier in that regard.
Your points about Rutgers and Maryland are far weaker: although it’s true that there’s a lot of talent in their back yards, they have not actually proven that they can keep that talent local. Historically, they have not done so. And as I noted upthread, they face strong headwinds, because they have to play 3 kings every year, plus Dantonio’s Spartans, which aren’t going away.
LikeLike
Tom,
“I agree that WI has been on the cusp, but I think MSU’s recent run has been more impressive.”
We have the benefit of hindsight in knowing WI never took the next step. It remains to be seen where MSU goes from here. I think mostly that and recency bias make MSU’s current run seem better.
“Baylor made some mistakes, but at the end of the day MSU won the game.”
They did, but had to overcome a 20 point deficit in the 4th quarter. Baylor gave them a lot of help. If Baylor doesn’t commit several stupid penalties, they win. If Baylor runs the ball more, they win. If Baylor doesn’t give up long passes, they win.
4th qtr:
Baylor misses a long field goal after a penalty and a sack almost drove them out of FG range.
MSU hits a 50 yard pass on the next play.
MSU scores a TD at 12:09.
MSU recovers an onside kick.
MSU hits a 39 yard pass.
MSU throws an INT. Baylor returned it for a TD but was called for a penalty during the return.
Baylor turns it over on downs 6 plays later (3 pass attempts with 2 incomplete).
MSU drives for a TD at 4:55.
MSU kicks the ball deep.
Baylor drives deep into MSU territory.
Baylor completes a slant to the 7 but the WR is called for a facemask.
Baylor’s drive stalls and MSU blocks the 44 yard FG attempt and returns it to the 45 yard line at 1:06 (6 passes in the drive).
MSU completes a 17 yard pass, then a 16 yard pass on 4th and 10 to get 1st and goal at 0:33.
MSU scores with about 20 seconds left.
Baylor is sacked twice and then throws an INT to end the game.
“WI had similar chances to pull out victories against TCU and Oregon but lost both times.”
I try not to draw major conclusions from 1 or 2 games. There are too many other variables. But as you noted, OR easily beat MSU this year so that has to factor in as well.
“And the B1G may not have had the best perception,”
That’s an understatement.
“but MSU did beat Stanford, which was the Pac 12’s best team that year”
And Stanford was an ideal matchup for MSU while OR and TCU were hideous matchups for WI.
“Recruiting isn’t everything but it does matter.”
It does, but research has shown that several B10 teams tend to outperform their recruiting rankings. Will better players fit into the system as well? Will they be willing to wait their turn to play? Do the coaches know how to deal with the egos?
“The teams that are elite and contend for NCs generally have the most talent. MSU’s past three classes (2013, 2014, 2015) were ranked 36, 25, and 22.”
Showing the MSU isn’t on that level.
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2015/2/6/7987571/recruiting-rankings-ratings-2015-college-football-teams
SB Nation compiled the 4 year recruiting ranking averages for all the I-A teams. MSU is 28th nationally and 4th in the B10, just behind PSU (26th) and just ahead of NE (29th). UMD and WI are 43 and 44 with RU, IN and NW at 48-50 and IA at 52. IL is 56, MN 60 and PU 61. The point is, very little separates most of the B10 schools in terms of recruiting but MSU is ahead of them as are the 4 kings.
“Yeah, I don’t expect MSU to finish with the #6 class in the country this year but it will certainly be in the top 15 come signing day.”
Little is certain in recruiting. MSU is 14th in average points per recruit right now, so it only takes a few schools with bigger classes to knock them down the list. It’s still a really strong class no matter what, though, don’t get me wrong.
“Bottom line is that they have more talent on the roster now compared to when Dantonio took over.”
At least more highly ranked talent. You never know for sure until they perform on the field.
“WI should be able to rack up wins in the West, but in the B1G title game or beyond, WI will be at a talent disadvantage and coaching can only get you so far as the B1G’s NC drought in basketball has shown.”
Still, you have to be in the game to have a chance to win. At least WI is likely to have lots of chances. That may be the final piece to upping their recruiting.
Anyway, my major point was that MSU hasn’t done much more than WI so clearly to me WI is the most likely school to reach MSU’s level.
LikeLike
How about we nominate topics for Frank’s next blog post?
My ideas:
(a) Options for next Big Ten TV contract. Do they split the rights now that are all owned by ESPN between Fox and ESPN? Would they all go to one or the other? Would more content be directed towards the BTN? How much will this net the Big Ten?
(b) ACC Network. Will one happen? How will ESPN/ACC be able to recapture rights that have been passed on the Raycom and FSN in order to create a network? How much will this be worth to the ACC?
(c) SEC Network. Will it, in the long run, allow the SEC to be competitive with Big Ten money after the B1G cashes in on its next TV deal?
(d) Ed O’Bannon case. What is happening in the appeals process? What about other lawsuits against the NCAA? How will the results change college sports?
I’d love to hear other topics you’d like to hear from Frank about.
LikeLike
Michael in Raleigh,
“How about we nominate topics for Frank’s next blog post?”
Why? We’ve got several months before we’re due for one.
“(a) Options for next Big Ten TV contract. Do they split the rights now that are all owned by ESPN between Fox and ESPN? Would they all go to one or the other? Would more content be directed towards the BTN? How much will this net the Big Ten?”
Unless some leaks come out, that’s all speculation. Most people highly doubt all the rights would go away from ESPN. It’s either all ESPN or a split between ESPN and Fox.
“(b) ACC Network. Will one happen? How will ESPN/ACC be able to recapture rights that have been passed on the Raycom and FSN in order to create a network? How much will this be worth to the ACC?”
It’ll have minimal monetary value if it ever happens.
“(c) SEC Network. Will it, in the long run, allow the SEC to be competitive with Big Ten money after the B1G cashes in on its next TV deal?”
I think the longterm question is the other way around. Can the B10 keep up with the SEC in the future? They get a new deal in 2024 (IIRC) and the SECN will be more lucrative than the BTN due to the obsessive level of fandom in the south. Especially if bundling goes away, you’ll see SECN money greatly outpace BTN money.
“(d) Ed O’Bannon case. What is happening in the appeals process? What about other lawsuits against the NCAA? How will the results change college sports?”
It’s so hard to predict how trials will come out. It’s just more pure speculation. We engage in planty of that on our own.
LikeLike
We need a new topic because we’re done to a half dozen posts a day, half of them yours.
LikeLike
It’s the off season. Things slow down over summer.
Besides, nothing has ever stopped us from discussing a new topic on our own. Throw something out there and see what interests people.
LikeLike
C) Is actually a fairly interesting question right now.
Brian,
An overlooked part of the SEC Network deal was a 10 year extension with ESPN through 2034. The CBS contract is still up in 10 years, but the bulk of the SEC inventory is now locked up for the next 20 years.
LikeLike
Nostradamus,
“C) Is actually a fairly interesting question right now.”
Yes, it is. We just have no basis to answer it.
“An overlooked part of the SEC Network deal was a 10 year extension with ESPN through 2034. The CBS contract is still up in 10 years, but the bulk of the SEC inventory is now locked up for the next 20 years.”
Which is just after the BTN deal ends, so they get last dibs.
But I expect to see their Tier 1 deal skyrocket in 2024 and the SECN to rake in money. The B10 should have the Tier 1 advantage for a while, but especially if the cable model changes I think the overall totals may favor the SEC. Anyway, I suppose it partially depends what time window we’re discussing as long term (2017-2023 or 2024-2032 or 2034-???).
Upcoming dates of relevance:
2017 – new B10 tiers 1&2 deal (B10 should take a financial lead)
2024 – new SEC tier 1 deal (SEC should take the lead)
2032 – new BTN deal (B10 could retake the lead)
2034 – new SEC tier 2 and SECN deals (SEC could retake or extend the lead)
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13093084/playoff-committee-wait-army-navy-necessary
The CFP’s plan is to wait for Army-Navy if it matters, and ignore it if it doesn’t. The CFP’s Board of Managers (aka the conference commissioners) has to vote to approve the plan.
LikeLike
http://www.ncaa.com/interactive-bracket/baseball/d1
CWS update.
UVA and Vandy have advanced to the semifinals undefeated. UVA plays the winner of UF vs Miami. Vandy gets the LSU vs TCU winner.
LikeLike
UF crushed Miami, so they face UVA tomorrow afternoon.
TCU leads LSU 6-3 in the 5th. The winner plays Vandy tomorrow night.
LikeLike
UF leads UVA 4-1 in the 6th. If UF wins, they’ll play again tomorrow with the winner going to the finals. UVA beat UF when they played earlier in the CWS, so they’re having a best of 3 to make the finals.
TCUis in the same spot as UF with Vandy in the role of UVA. Vandy won the first game and they play tonight at 8pm. TCU has to win twice to advance, Vandy just once.
LikeLike
Vandy won and advanced, UF and UVA play tonight. Will the ACC stay alive for their first title since WF in 1955?
LikeLike
UVA came back to win 5-4. UVA vs Vandy in a best of 3 series starts tomorrow. It’s a rematch of last year’s finals which Vandy won.
LikeLike
Game 1 started scoreless through 5.5, but Vandy’s bats came to life in the bottom of the 6th for 2 runs and they’re scoring again in the 7th (3 more so far). Meanwhile, UVA has 1 hit.
I’ll call this one for Vandy. UVA needs to win 2 in a row to snap the ACC’s long title drought.
LikeLike
http://www.ncaa.com/game/baseball/d1/2015/06/23/vanderbilt-virginia
UVA leads 3-0 after 6. Looks like we’ll have a decisive game 3 tomorrow night.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/102510/where-do-sec-football-players-come-from-look-to-georgia-and-specifically-atlanta
A look at where SEC football players come from (2006-2015 classes). Surprising to me was GA outpaced FL. TX came in third. Atlanta actually outpaced all the other states but those 3.
LikeLike
Not terribly surprising to me because GA is in the heart of the SEC (so close to a bunch of SEC power programs) while FL has 2 non-SEC kings along with UF fighting for players. Plus SFla (which has one of the densest concentrations of football talent in the country) is far from everywhere outside of FL. No non-FL SEC school is within 500 miles of Miami and SFla is populated by a lot of families from the North, who spread their loyalties and influencing the culture there, so it’s not surprising to see SFla players deciding to play farther away. Culturally, Miami is probably closer to the mid-Atlantic than the Deep South.
And indeed, when you look at where the Rivals top 50 in GA and FL went:
In GA:
10 went to non-SEC schools in or adjacent to GA while 7 went to non-SEC schools farther away while
In FL:
13 went to non-SEC schools in or adjacent to FL (mostly FSU) while 21 went to non-SEC schools farther away. Of those, 16 went to non-SEC schools that weren’t adjacent to GA either.
LikeLike
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2015/4/15/8143431/states-most-players-recruits
This is why I was surprised:
FL produced 1295 3* or better recruits in 2011-2015 while GA produced “only” 758.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25217522/report-baylor-in-talks-for-2016-opener-in-australia-vs-pac-12-team
Baylor may play Cal in Australia to open the 2016 season.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25217337/ucla-adds-another-sec-foe-georgia-to-its-non-conference-schedule
UCLA is looking to dominate the SEC. They play TAMU in 2016-7, LSU in 2021 and 2024 and now UGA in 2025-6. It’s good to see some P12/SEC games.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25217275/big-ten-west-overunder-win-total-picks
B10 West over/under win totals (regular season only):
WI – 10
NE – 8
IA – 7.5
NW – 6
MN – 5.5
PU – 4
IL – 3.5
Ouch. Sorry Frank.
LikeLike
I’d move Iowa down and Minny up. Kill and his staff can coach. Do those guys realize that Kill actually has more wins than Ferentz the past 3 years? And it’s not like Iowa is outrecruiting Minny recently either.
LikeLike
From the article:
I was surprised by this total considering the Gophers have eight wins in each of the last two seasons, but they did lose some key members from last year’s squad. With a non-conference schedule that includes a home date against TCU and a road trip to Colorado State, it’s not entirely impossible for Minnesota to start the year 2-2 (I don’t see upset losses to Kent State or Ohio coming), though I believe 3-1 is more likely. In Big Ten play the Gophers drew the short end of the stick when it comes to cross-divisional opponents, landing both Michigan (at home) and Ohio State (in Columbus). Elsewhere the Gophers will have to start Big Ten play on the road against Northwestern and Purdue, both beatable teams, but more difficult outside Minneapolis. It’s a tough schedule, but given Jerry Kill’s track record, I have a hard time believing this team is going to finish the season 4-8. So I’m going with the over here, but I certainly understand if you want to go after the value associated with the under. It’s not totally out of the question.
So it’s probably the players lost from last year combined with their schedule. I agree 5.5 seems low, though. 6.5 would have been a better number, I think.
LikeLike
The Johns Hopkins women’s lacrosse team will join the Big Ten in 2016–17 as an affiliate member, joining the Hopkinks men’s lacrosse team, which just completed its first season of competition in the Big Ten.
Adding the Hopkins men’s team was essential if the Big Ten was going to sponsor the sport. Only five full members play lacrosse, one short of the minimum of six needed to guarantee an NCAA autobid for the conference champion.
But the Big Ten didn’t need the Hopkins women’s team, since it already has six full members. (Northwestern is has women’s lacrosse, but not men’s. Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Maryland, and Rutgers have both.) So it’s fair to conclude that the conference is happy with the relationship after one season.
LikeLike
More importantly, perhaps, JHU appears happy with the relationship. In 2 more years, the men’s team has to decide whether to join the B10 for good or to leave after 5 years. This is a positive sign for that, and perhaps opens the door wider for JHU to join the CIC later on.
LikeLike
This.
LikeLike
The CIC is not relevant. It is a lobbying organization. It has no, as in no, money. People should stop talking about it as if it were some source of money or some big attraction. They don’t even have their own building. The B1G gives them office space in its building.
All research dollars at every university are generated entirely by individual faculty effort. In fact, faculty are hired based upon their demonstrated or implied ability to get external funds. If they don’t they are either fired if they lack tenure or side-lined without further promotion or pay raises if they have tenure. Trust me on this. I was a departmental P&T chair for many years at a B1G school.
The JHU faculty are world superstars at getting external dollars. They don’t need the CIC, but like U. Chicago they might feel it would supplement their own lobbying efforts. JHU evidently chose the B1G over the ACC because the B1G is full of high-powered research institutions and the ACC isn’t.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“The CIC is not relevant.”
The B10 presidents and faculty disagree.
“It is a lobbying organization.”
Factually incorrect.
“It has no, as in no, money.”
Factually incorrect.
“People should stop talking about it as if it were some source of money or some big attraction.”
1. It is a big attraction. Faculty and presidents at schools in many different conferences have talked about it and how much better it is than anything other conferences have done yet.
2. It is a source of money via savings, investments that don’t need to be made and increased research grants due to facilities shared and faculty working together.
3. It has advantages for students and faculty above and beyond money.
4. The CIC does actually give seed grants for certain things.
“They don’t even have their own building.”
Correct. But why would they need one to be relevant? Many important groups don’t have an entire building to themselves.
“The B1G gives them office space in its building.”
The B10 lets the CIC hold group meetings in the B10’s conference center, if that’s what you mean, but that is not their headquarters. The CIC is based in Champaign, IL.
“All research dollars at every university are generated entirely by individual faculty effort.”
Factually incorrect (even without the CIC that’s not true).
“In fact, faculty are hired based upon their demonstrated or implied ability to get external funds.”
In part, yes. So?
“The JHU faculty are world superstars at getting external dollars. They don’t need the CIC, but like U. Chicago they might feel it would supplement their own lobbying efforts.”
Exactly. Nobody ever claimed that JHU needs the CIC, but we can certainly see value to the CIC (and thus the B10 schools) in having JHU join the CIC.
“JHU evidently chose the B1G over the ACC because the B1G is full of high-powered research institutions and the ACC isn’t.”
Maybe. Or maybe because the B10 seemed more stable to them. Or maybe they felt the B10 was better run. Or maybe they liked the BTN concept to show road lacrosse games from JHU, too. Or maybe it was something else entirely. Or, most likely, it was some combination of these things.
LikeLike
“‘All research dollars at every university are generated entirely by individual faculty effort.’
Factually incorrect (even without the CIC that’s not true).”
Precisely. All competitive funding is received in part due to individual faculty effort, but facilities also play a role in competitive grants, since part of the scoring for competitive grants involves cost-effectiveness. One could say “primarily” due to individual effort … but if you are an academic heavily dependent on gaining research funding in order for your career to advance and to be able to fund and therefore attract graduate students, a 10% in your research proposal’s score due to better institutional support is a substantial benefit, and opportunities to become involved in ongoing research teams can be a critical part of establishing an academic research career.
LikeLike
What did Texas AD Steve Patterson do to Chip Brown?
http://www.scout.com/college/texas/story/1556266-hd-exclusive-ad-patterson-facing-heat
More than 18 months after Patterson’s hire to replace 32-year Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds, Patterson is credited with making solid hires in football coach Charlie Strong and basketball coach Shaka Smart.
But more and more inside the Longhorn community are fed up with what they say is an athletic director who can’t or won’t relate to people and who puts making money or saving money above everything – even Texas student-athletes and coaches, who have seen cuts by Patterson impact them directly.
After more than three dozen interviews with those connected to Texas athletics, Patterson, who spent most of his career in the front offices of pro teams (Houston’s Rockets, Texans and Aeros as well as president and GM of the Portland Trail Blazers), is being blamed for misleading football season ticket holders, being disingenuous about funding for a new tennis facility (leading to a coach’s resignation), alienating longtime donors as well as faculty and staff, running off UT’s band director, defying former school president Bill Powers, planting a vicious press leak targeting former basketball coach Rick Barnes and of being more loyal to Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott than to those at Texas or the Big 12.
LikeLike
Patterson has rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, not just Chip Brown. Maybe he fired Brown’s best source inside the AD.
He didn’t handle the big donors well during the Strong hire. He may not be a good pairing with Strong. Previously, Mack Brown was the big schmoozer. Strong doesn’t like that and isn’t really comfortable doing that. So Patterson should be the one doing that, but he doesn’t seem to like it either.
LikeLike
Not sure how international marketing became Scott’s personal domain.
I think I linked this back when Patterson was hired, but it’s worth a re read in the current context
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2013/12/canzano_steve_patterson_and_te.html
LikeLike
It sounds like Patterson hired former Michigan AD Dave Brandon as his career coach.
Seriously, it’s not often that you see a story that critical from a homer like Chip Brown. Typically, these reporters either don’t criticize the current administration — or they do so with an extremely light-handed touch — because their livelihood depends on access, which the school is under no obligation to honor.
LikeLike
Big Ten Distributions expected to be $34.7 million per school in fiscal year 2016 per Michigan.
http://www.mgoblue.com/genrel/061815aaa.html
LikeLike
That’s a slight increase from earlier projections for that same fiscal year, IIRC.
LikeLike
Click to access Rutgers%20Athletics%20Final%206%2018%2015.pdf
RU announced a master plan for athletic upgrades yesterday. It’ll include new facilities for multiple sports in the football stadium, FB getting the Hale Center to itself and a new multi-use facility for hoops. No timetable or budget, though, as it will be funded almost entirely by donations apparently.
It’s part of the Rutgers 2030 campaign, so I suppose that’s the upper limit on the timeline.
LikeLike
http://www.purduesports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/061915aab.html
Drew Brees gave $1M to the PU football master plan.
The Football Master Plan was designed by athletics director Morgan Burke and head football coach Darrell Hazell to create a championship-caliber program. It consists of five points: roster development, recruiting, fan engagement, university support and facilities. Each of those topics was discussed in depth last week at a three-day summit involving university officials – including president Mitch Daniels, board of trustees chairman Tom Spurgeon and vice chairman Mike Berghoff – Burke, Hazell and members of the football coaching staff; Brees and other former football players; and additional alumni and supporters.
Hopefully this is a sign of PU trying to become a solid program again.
LikeLike
Long overdue. I was there during Bob Griese’s last year. It will be a long climb to get back to that level.
LikeLike
http://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2015/06/alabama_football_schedule_2019_2020_cowboys.html
Interesting contract details.
Alabama doesn’t have a date to open the 2017 or 2018 season, but there’s a placeholder for 2019 or 2020.
A provision in the contact for the Crimson Tide’s 2016 game with USC in Arlington, Texas calls for a possible return to AT&T Stadium in the future.
It says Alabama will “negotiate exclusively with ESPN in good faith through August 31, 2015 in an effort to schedule a football game between Alabama and a non-conference opponent to be held on August 31, 2019 or September 5, 2020 at the (AT&T) Stadium.”
The contract, dated Sept. 10 2014, also states Alabama will not schedule a non-conference game that would prevent it from playing in the 2019 or 2020 Cowboys Classic.
ESPN and Alabama would have to “mutually approve” the opponent in the game. The contract states Alabama will receive $6 million guaranteed for participation. Also, it says Alabama will receive “a minimum of $1,000,000 more than their opponent for the 2019 or 2020 game.”
Alabama will open the 2015 and 2016 seasons in the Cowboy Classic in the home of the Dallas Cowboys. It will receive $4 million to play Wisconsin this season and $6.5 million for the 2016 game with USC.
Florida and Michigan will meet in the 2017 Cowboys Classic while the 2018 version will feature LSU and Miami.
Any self-respecting major school should refuse to play AL in that game knowing AL was promised at least $1M more by ESPN. I’m sure ESPN will find a next tier P5 team to face them at worst.
LikeLike
http://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2015/06/alabama_wisconsin_football_game_contract.html
Some notes from the AL vs WI contract:
— Alabama will be the home team and will wear crimson jerseys against Wisconsin.
— The game officials and replay crew will be from the Big 12.
— The Cowboys will set ticket prices that “will not exceed $400 per seat.” Student tickets will be available for $50. A seating chart included in the contract shows face-value ticket prices ranging from $300 to $125.
— A minimum of 25,000 tickets would be available for Alabama to re-sell to its fans.
— There was a provision in the contract, made in 2013, in case the SEC expanded to a nine-team conference schedule. That was a topic of discussion in 2014, but the league kept an eight-game plan. If it hadn’t, Alabama had the right to withdraw from the game.
— Also, Alabama (and presumably Wisconsin) could have been replaced if they were hit with major NCAA sanctions that limited scholarships, resulted in post-season bans of two or more years and the loss of 12 or more scholarships.
— At no charge, Alabama will receive 250 tickets, two suites, 75 parking passes, seating for the marching band and admission for the cheerleaders, dance team and mascot. It will also have access to a field-level club with access for 350 people).
— Game organizers preferred to keep all of this information private. The contract included a clause titled “public disclosures.” In it, the parties “agree to keep the terms of this Agreement confidential and not to disclose these terms to any other party.” It, however acknowledges public institutions like Alabama are subject to public records law. It also calls for Alabama to notify the Cowboys and ESPN in the case of a public records request (like the one used to obtain the contract for this story).
— Alcohol may be sold through the end of the third quarter.
— “Both teams will be treated equally for pageantry elements.”
— The Cowboys will decide whether to open or close the roof but “will be guided by the safety of the student athletes and the comfort of fans.” (The roof was closed for Alabama’s 2012 win over Michigan in the same stadium)
— The SEC owns exclusive rights to telecast the game live. Both conferences have the right to distribute the game on a delayed basis “throughout the universe.”
LikeLike
http://seminolepost.blog.palmbeachpost.com/2015/06/19/florida-state-alabama-to-open-2017-season-in-atlanta/
AL and FSU will open 2017 in Atlanta. There’s no contract yet, but they’ll each make $4-5M.
LikeLike
http://www.ktvb.com/story/sports/ncaaf/boise-state/2015/06/18/ed-board-approves-pre-game-alcohol-sales-at-boise-state/28943683/
Boise will now be selling pre-game beer starting 3 hours before kickoff.
LikeLike
http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/luke-decock/article24798238.html
A local reporter says UNC is already feeling the hurt from the academic scandal. Recruits are shying away and players are leaving. He mentions CFB, MBB and WBB explicitly as suffering and notes that UNC didn’t win a single ACC title in 2013-4 for the first time ever. I think they won a couple this past year in minor sports.
Roy Williams this spring lamented his inability to get top prospects to visit the campus, let alone sign them, a staggering admission for a coach who at Kansas and North Carolina routinely landed the best players in the country. Kinston’s Brandon Ingram, the state’s top-ranked player, said the threat of sanctions was a significant factor in choosing Duke over North Carolina in April.
It was the latest recruiting miss for the Tar Heels, who don’t have a top-50 recruit for next season and only added a second commitment because he was released from his letter of intent to Virginia Commonwealth when Shaka Smart left.
That’s what will hurt UNC the most, losing out to Duke in hoops. If NCSU starts beating them, then it’s all over.
LikeLike
WSU president passes.
http://www.sltrib.com/home/2647110-155/story.html
LikeLike
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/06/16/waiting-on-the-obannon-appeal-will-the-9th-circuit-overturn-wilkens-ruling/?doing_wp_cron=1434845811.1649999618530273437500
A quick thought on the NCAA’s appeal of the O’Bannon decision. Does the delay indicate that the 9th Circuit CoA has issues with part or all of her decision? As Wilner points out, it typically takes 3-12 months to get a decision and oral arguments only ended in March. Her injunction doesn’t kick kick in until 8/1 so there’s some time left.
LikeLike
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/06/19/pac-12-conference-explaining-the-new-multimedia-rights-venture/
Explaining what the P12 is doing with multimedia rights and how that might turn out.
At the conclusion of its CEO meetings two weeks ago, the Pac-12 announced the creation of an internal sales unit that would handle the multimedia rights for any school that wanted to participate in the endeavor.
While hardly a break-the-Internet development — sponsorship sales is the opposite of a sexy story — the venture is nonetheless significant because it’s revolutionary (for reasons I’ll explain), it carries inherent risk (for reasons I’ll explain), and it could provide a revenue boost for the participating schools (ditto).
I spent a portion of the past 10 days discussing the league’s plan with eight industry sources — contacts that are familiar with both the conference and the sale of multimedia rights at the collegiate level.
This topic might be unfamiliar to many fans/readers, so before drawing conclusions, let’s: 1) define multimedia rights, 2) examine how they have been handled in the past and 3) outline how the Pac-12 wants to turn the existing model on its head.
…
Multimedia rights consist of, but are not limited to, signage in stadiums/arenas and sponsorships for corporate dealings, radio broadcasts and digital content (i.e., websites). They do not include apparel sales, which are contracted out to Nike, Adidas, Under Armour, etc.
Schools typically reap seven figures annually on their multimedia rights, but the range (high seven figures, or low) depends on the market.
…
For as long as it has mattered, the schools have outsourced the sale of their multimedia rights to the Learfields and IMGs of the world.
…
Learfield/IMG would guarantee $5 million per year (for example) to School X in multimedia rights income, regardless of the dollar value of the actually sales.
If Learfield/IMG sold $7 million in sponsorships, it would pocket the $2 million difference, less expenses. (At a certain threshold, revenue is shared between the seller and the school.)
If Learfield/IMG sold $3 million in sponsorships, it would take a loss.
…
The Pac-12 is detonating that model by bringing the multimedia rights in house — by forming its own sales unit.
Again, generally speaking: Participating schools will pay the conference an administrative buy-in fee (believed to be low-to-mid six figures), and a league-trained/operated sales team will canvass the local markets for sponsorships in the same manner Learfield/IMG staffers would.
The conference believes … I’m continuing the example from above … that it can match the $7 million in gross sales generated by Learfield/IMG on an annual basis, with School X keeping all of it, minus the buy-in fee.
Sound intrigue, no? The conference is cutting out the middleman in a growing, lucrative space, with schools having more control over their signage/sponsorships because the sale staff will be working for them, not a third party.
There’s a downside, however: The lack of scale means reduced leverage, less margin for error and greater risk in a bad economy. Sponsorship sales isn’t an easy business, and the Pac-12 will be responsible for hiring and training the staff, with success riding on the outcome.
(Important point II: Learfield/IMG have decades of sales expertise. All the glowing projections in the world will be rendered meaningless if the Pac-12 entity cannot sell as well as the market leaders it’s replacing.)
Schools in all the power conferences are watching carefully to see if the middlemen are truly as essential as their reputations indicate.
So, of course, are Learfield and IMG. Their business models would be in jeopardy if the Pac-12 plan works.
…
At this point, let’s address the landscape. Three critical points:
1. As has been documented extensively on the Hotline, the Pac-12 is facing a significant revenue gap in coming years:
The SEC and Big Ten schools could receive $8 – $12 – $15 million more per year from their TV deals if the Pac-12 Networks continue to lag in subscriptions and revenue.
The league’s multimedia rights plan, although groundbreaking, won’t come close to erasing that revenue gap. Industry sources believe successful execution by the league’s sale arms could result in anywhere from $1 million (average) to $2 million (high side) in additional revenue for the participants.
…
2. The conference office has a credibility issue on many of the campuses because its other major in-house project, the Pac-12 Networks, have under-performed significantly (11 million subs and $1 million per school/year in income).
…
3. The plan is not for everyone, as evidenced by the fact that schools have been given the option to participate.
USC and UCLA, for instance, want no part of it: The Trojans have Fox and are thrilled, while UCLA is almost assuredly playing the long game with IMG (negotiations underway).
That means the Los Angeles basin (population: 22 million) is off the table, and several sources questioned the upside potential for a sales entity that lacks access to what is, by far, the league’s largest market.
…
4. How many school will ultimately opt into the program?
That’s anyone’s guess, because most schools are under contract with Learfield/IMG for at least three, and in some cases nine, more years.
They could attempt to severe their existing third-party contracts, but don’t count on that approach: Arizona State tried it with IMG … and IMG has responded by claiming $34 million in damages.
Instead, the campuses will monitor’s the Pac-12 sales arm’s progress and weigh their options when their rights come up for renewal.
Bottom line:
Give Scott and his team credit for creativity — he doesn’t think outside the box; he lives there — in the endless search for new revenue.
I wonder how seriously the B10 has looked at doing this? They have a lot of major markets to tap and probably higher demand for sponsorship opportunities. They also have some experience with ad sales via BTN. FOX has experience running USC’s rights and obviously via ad sales. Most of the schools used to do this in house until recently, so there may be some institutional knowledge that would ease the transition. Would a joint B10/FOX venture make sense?
LikeLike
Doesn’t mention some other negatives.
Lack of expertise
Lack of contacts
Lack of scale (not just diversification)
Its hubris that you can do something outside your area of expertise better than the experts.
Maybe it will work. Mostly likely, they do poorly. Michigan St. does it in house. WVU just went to Learfield (or IMG) and is getting a lot more money. Every other major besides ASU is outsourcing it.
LikeLike
Lack of expertise
Lack of contacts
I wonder if they’ll use the sales staff from the PTN? That team should have the expertise and contacts.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25218468/pac-12-making-effort-to-care-for-ex-athletes-medical-costs
The P12 is leading the way on post-career medical treatment.
The Pac-12 is believed to be the first conference to direct schools to pay post-college medical costs for sports-related injuries that an athlete suffered at their school. What eligibility criteria is used by Pac-12 schools will help determine how much help former athletes receive and at what costs without people abusing the benefit. The new practice could also set a blueprint for the NCAA or other conferences to follow or avoid.
Pac-12 schools must provide direct medical expenses for at least four years following the athlete’s graduation or separation from the university, or until the athlete turns 26 years old, whichever occurs first. The timeframe for coverage was chosen in part because by the age of 26 a person is covered by the Affordable Care Act.
Each school will establish its own policies and procedures to determine who is eligible for the benefit. The conference office has no role in oversight, leaving Pac-12 schools to figure out the best approach.
…
The Pac-12 bylaw states that a school’s policies to determine eligibility “may include the required disclosure of pre-existing conditions not related to participation in intercollegiate athletics, mandatory reporting of injuries suffered during athletics participation at the institution, required participation in an exit physical upon graduation or separation from the institution, and other criteria that an institution deems appropriate.” In other words, Pac-12 schools are on their own to figure this out.
…
Most likely, Pac-12 schools will use exit medical evaluations of players to determine eligibility and buy insurance policies that carry stipulations, such as for in-network and out-of-network coverage. However, Cohen said finding insurance to cover an injury for four years out is difficult because most providers want a condition treated within two years. Cohen said Arizona will likely add four years to its insurance plan at a cost of a couple hundred thousand dollars a year, and require that for athletes to have costs covered they show a preexisting injury, undergo a departing physical when leaving the college, and demonstrate they followed recommendations for their health.
…
The NCAA requires that college athletes have a primary health insurance policy while they play, but the universities don’t have to pay for it. The insurance can come from the school, a parent, or an athlete’s personal policy, and must cover up to the deductible of the NCAA’s catastrophic injury insurance program that starts when expenses exceed $90,000.
…
At UCLA and USC, for instance, those schools’ 2014-15 athlete handbooks said the primary insurance policy is billed first for a current athlete and all subsequent approved costs are paid for by the athletic department. Anecdotally, this appears to be a typical practice by NCAA members.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/06/19/college-football-how-to-fix-student-attendance-decline/29007681/
How to increase student attendance at games.
LikeLike
Given that things are slow right now, I’d like some opinions as to which NCAA sports people find significant, and in what order. I don’t have any particular definition of “significant”, but some factors I would include public popularity, personal taste, intrinsic (subjective) “worth” of the game, historical significance, # of schools who participate et al….As examples, I hate women’s basketball, but would acknowledge that the networks like it and very good teams get good attendance. Also, not many people go to track meets these days, but almost everyone would view track as a serious sport.
I know some people will say only 2 sports count….if that’s your view I get it……I personally like college sports generally, and have given almost every sport at least a look now and then…..My other caveat is that I personally see men’s sports as more significant than women’s, as a general rule….however, I really like certain women’s sports like softball, V-Ball…..
All that said here’s my list:
1. Football
2. M’s Basketball
3. Baseball–Somewhat regional, but the Big 10 is now stepping up a little. The College WS is a much better event than the W’s BB Final 4, imo. Plus, only 2/3 teams have a shot at winning the W’s BB title.
4. Women’s Basketball–Boring………………
5. M’s Ice Hockey
6. W’s Volleyball–Long and lean, if you know what I mean……fast game
7. M’s OT & F-Jesse Owens
8. Wrestling
9. Softball–Really a great game. I personally prefer it to baseball as a spectator sport.
10. M’s soccer–Doesn’t seem to be catching on….kind of stagnant in it’s appeal
11. M’s Swimming & Diving-Mark Spitz
12. M’s IT & F–Isn’t outdoor enough?
13. W’s gymnastics
14. M’s Lacrosse
15. W’s OT&F
16. W’s Ice Hockey
17. W’s soccer
18. W’s Lacrosse
19. W’s Swimming & Diving
20. W’s IT& F
21. Men’s CC
22. Field Hockey–not quite as boring as CC
23. W’s CC
24. M’s Golf
25. W’s Golf
26. Men’s V-Ball–Not a bad sport, but very few teams
27. Men’s Tennis
28. Men’s Gymnastics–It’s fallen on hard times…Title 9
29. W’s Tennis
30. M’s Water Polo—Interesting, but too regional
31. W’s WP–The women are too damn big to be of much interest—nut crunchers
32. Rowing
33. Fencing
34. Skiing
35. Rifle
36. Bowling–Only championship where the participant’s are drunk
LikeLike
Sounds like you should rank bowling a lot higher.
I was bowling in a league in college and had to take off for 3 weeks due to a back strain I probably got playing racquetball. I had trouble even walking up and down stairs. However, one of our team members was joining the army and we would forfeit the last week if I didn’t bowl and we were in first place. So I drank about a half dozen beers and bowled the best game I had ever bowled. It was years before I ever topped that game.
LikeLike
At one time, and maybe even now, the western branch of tOSU student center had both candle pin and ten pin bowling alleys.
LikeLike
mushroomgod,
“Given that things are slow right now, I’d like some opinions as to which NCAA sports people find significant, and in what order.”
CFB
MBB
WBB
Baseball
Wrestling
Hockey
Lacrosse
It’s basically a list of the revenue sports in order of revenue. The first 3 are the national revenue sports. The last 4 are regional (not all P5 schools play), but baseball is much more common. I only added lacrosse because it’s growing while the others aren’t. These are also the only sports that seem to influence expansion.
The other sports are nice for the athletes but have no significance beyond that. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. It’s what college sports are supposed to be – sports for the sake of the sports and nothing more.
LikeLike
No soccer?
LikeLike
Nope.
How is college soccer significant (not the sport in general, just the college version)? Is it a money maker? Has it impacted realignment? Does it draw sizable TV ratings? Huge crowds?
LikeLike
Are you saying it’s lower than lacrosse? Certainly there is far more partidipation in soccer than lacrosse or even hockey. That’s not revenue, but I have to think soccer is at least equivalent to those two in revenue.
You’re good at data. Dig it up.
Re Disclosure of Interest: I despise soccer.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“Are you saying it’s lower than lacrosse?”
Yes, because lacrosse impacted realignment (the B10 adding JHU). I have not heard of any expansion decisions based on soccer.
“Certainly there is far more partidipation in soccer than lacrosse or even hockey.”
Of course there is. But that doesn’t mean significance to me.
“That’s not revenue, but I have to think soccer is at least equivalent to those two in revenue.”
Not to hockey. And I already said I only included lacrosse for realignment reasons.
Revenue (for B10 schools, 2012-3 year):
M hockey (6 teams) – $23.430M = $3.905M/team
W hockey (4) – $2.787M = $0.697M/team
M lacrosse (4) – $2.513M = $0.628M/team
W soccer (12) – $4.560M = $0.38M/team
M soccer (7) – $2.310M = $0.33M/team
W lacrosse (4) – $1.266M = $0.317M/team
Expenses (for B10 schools, 2012-3 year):
M hockey (6 teams) – $22.501M = $3.750M/team
W hockey (4) – $9.345M = $2.336M/team
W soccer (12) – $17.610M = $1.468M/team
W lacrosse (4) – $5.706M = $1.427M/team
M lacrosse (4) – $5.224M = $1.306M/team
M soccer (7) – $8.947M = $1.278M/team
Profit (for B10 schools, 2012-3 year):
M hockey (6 teams) – $0.929M = $0.155M/team
M lacrosse (4) – -$2.711M = -$0.678M/team
M soccer (7) – -$6.637M = -$0.948M/team
W soccer (12) – -$13.050M = -$1.088M/team
W lacrosse (4) – -$4.440M = -$1.110M/team
W hockey (4) – -$6.558M = -$1.640M/team
LikeLike
Soccer may end up being a factor in Sun Belt expansion.
LikeLike
Arkstfan,
“Soccer may end up being a factor in Sun Belt expansion.”
If it ends of being a major factor there, that would increase its significance. Perhaps enough that’s I’d add it to the bottom of the list. But lacrosse impacted P5 expansion which is more significant IMO.
LikeLike
Baseball isn’t regional. Its just that Big 10 schools chose not to be competitive for 50 years.
LikeLike
bullet,
“Baseball isn’t regional.”
Yes, it is by the definition of regional I included with that statement (not all P5 schools play it). The P12 school by the Rockies, the northernmost B12 school, the second most northern B10 school and the northernmost non-coastal ACC school all don’t play. That isn’t coincidence.
“Its just that Big 10 schools chose not to be competitive for 50 years.”
Magically essentially all northern schools made that same choice apparently as none of them won the CWS.
LikeLike
You are just biased against Arkansas State being good at bowling
LikeLike
‘shroom – good topic! Here’s my list. I (mostly) used your criteria.
1. Football
2. Men’s Basketball
3. Baseball (not a regional sport as there are 298 D-1 teams all over the country, its just dominated by sunbelt teams including my Tigers)
4. Men’s Outdoor Track & Field (original Olympic sport, LSU has won multiple NCs & my son throws the javelin at The Citadel)
5. Wrestling (original Olympic sport)
6. Women’s Basketball (I think its unwatchable, but its the biggest girls’ sport)
7. Softball (291 D-1 teams and lots of exposure on the family of networks)
8. Women’s Volleyball (332 D-1 teams)
9. Men’s Lacrosse (regional sport with only 68 D-1 teams, but good exposure from ESPN and a growing sport)
10. Men’s Hockey (could be higher but regional and only 59 D-1 teams)
11. Women’s Gymnastics (popular Olympic sport and draws big crowds at dominant schools)
12. Women’s Soccer (a watchable girls’ sport with 327 D-1 teams)
13. Men’s Soccer (204 D-1 teams)
14. Men’s Golf (LSU won the NC this year)
15. Women’s Outdoor Track & Field (lots of teams and LSU has won a gazillion NCs)
16. Sand Volleyball
17. Men’s Indoor Track & Field
18. Women’s Indoor Track & Field
19. Women’s Golf
20. Women’s Tennis
21. Men’s Tennis
22. Women’s Swimming & Diving
23. Men’s Swimming & Diving
24. Every other sport, except
Next to last: Bowling
Last: Fencing
LikeLike
Alan from Baton Rouge,
“3. Baseball (not a regional sport as there are 298 D-1 teams all over the country, its just dominated by sunbelt teams including my Tigers)”
I called it regional but then immediately explained my definition of regional for this – not all P5 teams play it (WI, CO, SU and ISU all lack teams). That’s why I put WBB above it.
If they fixed the season, maybe some of those schools would add it back.
LikeLike
298 D1 teams are managing the season just fine now. It’s purely an allocation of resources question. I’m pretty sure Alan’s Tigers wouldn’t mind getting to hit in mile high air if Colo were to restore and somehow was a regional host. 😀
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“298 D1 teams are managing the season just fine now.”
No, they aren’t. Many of them (see warm weather schools) are, but nowhere near all 298. Plenty of them are just barely managing it and suffering large financial losses due to the weather forcing a ridiculous number of road trips to start the year.
The season starts in mid-February. That is in no way, shape or form baseball season. MLB players haven’t even reported for spring training at that point. The average high temperature is still below freezing in Minneapolis at that point. That forces MN to play 5 weeks of road games to start the year. That’s basically 1/3 of the schedule. MN actually played 6 weeks of road games before their home opener this year, but the sixth week was a road B10 series. That made it late March before they got a home game. MLB opening day wasn’t until early April.
Because they started with so many road games, MN is forced to choose between good OOC games to help their RPI or buying home games. MN ended with just 21 home games and 30 on the road. Simple math says they split their remaining games 21-14 in favor of home games. 24 of those were B10 games (12-12 split), so they went 9-2 for OOC games to beef up the home schedule. That still results in a 9-20 split of OOC games.
Contrast that with a school like LSU that can open at home in mid-February because the average high is 64 degrees. They played 13 straight at home before going to Houston for a tournament. They had a 14-3 split before starting SEC play. LSU ended with 34 home games and 21 road or neutral games during the regular season.
How much more expensive are all those road games, especially really distant ones? What do they have to give up to make the finances work?
“It’s purely an allocation of resources question.”
If even MLB says it isn’t time for baseball yet, it’s not just a resources issue. Look at which schools don’t have teams – most of the ones with the worst weather issues, especially relative to the rest of their conference.
“I’m pretty sure Alan’s Tigers wouldn’t mind getting to hit in mile high air if Colo were to restore and somehow was a regional host”
And how happy would they be to play there in February for an OOC game?
LikeLike
NCAA backed up the start already. Until somewhat recently they started in early January.
LSU plays home to pay for that beautiful stadium: resource, not competition driven. Georgia went to the north west preseason fairly recently. I don’t think we can make the regional climates equal no matter what time of year. Yes, baseball is easier earlier in the south. But it isn’t some insurmountable advantage. Tough circumstances can breed toughness.
Some teams in the south along with the west and north visit the early season tournaments (OU and OkSU were in Surprise, AZ this year).
There are othe ways to address SOS/RPI, like exempting perhaps 3 to 6 games so closer regional teams aren’t a scheduling liability. I’ve seen teams drop inspite of a 3 game sweep over a regional, but currently weak team. Or limit conferences to under 50% eligible for postseason selection/inclusion.
UVA just overcame an arguably rough year, barely making the field, having to travel to Lake Elsinore, and yet grabbed the brass ring.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“NCAA backed up the start already. Until somewhat recently they started in early January.”
So it used to be even worse. That doesn’t make it correct now. The NCAA needs to get over their obsession with single semester sports or shorten the season. Maybe play baseball over summer. When the pro league which has a season 3 times as long thinks the season shouldn’t start for 7 more weeks, then the NCAA is just wrong.
“LSU plays home to pay for that beautiful stadium: resource, not competition driven.”
And because they can. It’s literally impossible for many schools.
“Georgia went to the north west preseason fairly recently.”
They didn’t leave GA until SEC season this year. 2014 was GA and FL. 2013 was all GA. 2012 was all GA. 2011 was GA, FL, SC and southern CA (Los Angeles). 2010 was GA, TX, FL and AL.
“I don’t think we can make the regional climates equal no matter what time of year.”
No, but the schedule could make it possible for all regions. Nobody should have to start the season with 1/3 of their schedule on the road. Imagine if a southern CFB team was asked to play all of their November games in the north.
“Yes, baseball is easier earlier in the south. But it isn’t some insurmountable advantage.”
Apparently it is based on the CWS champions.
Northernmost non-coastal champs:
Vandy (2014)
OU (1994)
Wichita State (1989)
OSU (1966)
“Some teams in the south along with the west and north visit the early season tournaments (OU and OkSU were in Surprise, AZ this year).”
Do they all start the year with 15+ road games?
“There are othe ways to address SOS/RPI, like exempting perhaps 3 to 6 games so closer regional teams aren’t a scheduling liability. I’ve seen teams drop inspite of a 3 game sweep over a regional, but currently weak team. Or limit conferences to under 50% eligible for postseason selection/inclusion.”
Or wait until baseball weather is national to play. Or require more home games. Or reduce the length of the season.
LikeLike
Brian – I’ve spent some pretty cold Friday and Saturday nights at Alex Box stadium in February, but know I’ll get no sympathy from the Gophers on the board. At night with the wind-chill, it feels like the mid-40s.
Alex Box is the crown jewel of college stadiums and most AAA teams would love to have a home field like it. That said, LSU must be paying off the bonds a little early as my Tigers are venturing out a little more often to play OOC away games. This past season, they played a round robin tourney in Houston. Next season, they’ll play two mid-week games at Notre Dame. A H&H is scheduled with Texas in ’18 & ’19.
LikeLike
@Alan from Baton Rouge – Mid-40s in February? That weather in Chicago would mean that the polar ice caps have melted and all of Florida would be underwater.
LikeLike
Alan from Baton Rouge,
“Brian – I’ve spent some pretty cold Friday and Saturday nights at Alex Box stadium in February, but know I’ll get no sympathy from the Gophers on the board. At night with the wind-chill, it feels like the mid-40s.”
I only used LSU as an example because he brought them up. But considering that at MN the wind chill might well be near 0 degrees, I think my point is clear.
“Alex Box is the crown jewel of college stadiums and most AAA teams would love to have a home field like it. That said, LSU must be paying off the bonds a little early as my Tigers are venturing out a little more often to play OOC away games. This past season, they played a round robin tourney in Houston.”
ULM started off with 9 home games, then one other in LA, before starting their conference season. They didn’t leave TX, LA and MS except for conference games. They had 30 home games versus 21 road games. The point remains the same. Southern schools tend to be +9 in home games while northern teams get -9, and it’s because the NCAA insists on starting the season near Valentine’s Day while MLB hasn’t even started spring training.
“Next season, they’ll play two mid-week games at Notre Dame. A H&H is scheduled with Texas in ’18 & ’19.”
http://theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/12738286-123/first-look-at-lsus-2016
Many of LSU’s non-conference games for 2016 have been previously reported. The Tigers will meet Notre Dame in a two-game series in South Bend, Indiana, on May 10-11, between series against Arkansas and Tennessee.
Yes, you’ll play them in May. Any interest in playing in South Bend in February?
I’m not complaining about LSU wanting to play home games in their fancy stadium. I don’t think they’re scared to travel or anything. This is about the NCAA allowing weather to dictate that a large chunk of teams must play a disproportionate number of road games with over a month of them to start the season.
LikeLike
Brian said, “Yes, you’ll play them in May. Any interest in playing in South Bend in February?”
Uh, no. But if it makes you feel better, three of the four times LSU has played the Irish in football at South Bend, its been in November.
LikeLike
Frank – I guess next February, I’ll get no sympathy from Chicago either.
I’ve a lot of work with a merger & acquisition firm based out of Chicago over the last few years. My contact was with me in Monroe, LA a few Januarys ago for a site visit. Weather was in the low 30s, wind was blowing, it was raining and humidity was through the roof. My buddy said that weather was just as miserable as what he left in Chicago.
LikeLike
My list would be pretty similar to Alan’s, but I would move hockey to 8, men’s and women’s swimming (major Olympic sports) to 9 and 10, lacrosse down to 11, wrestling to #12 and sand volleyball to “other.”
LikeLike
Don’t look now, but 11 Big 10 teams are presently in the top 35 of Rivals 2016 football recruiting:
3..OSU
5. MSU
8. Michigan
13. PSU
25. Iowa
26. Wisky
30. NW
31. MD
33. Rutgers
33. Neb
35. Minnesota
55. Illinois
62. Purdue
66. IU
LSU and FSU currently #s 1 & 2
9 SEC teams are in the top 20, 10 in top 35, 12 in top 50….USC and Vandy are lagging
6 ACC teams in top 36, 11 in top 50…Duke is at 14
5 PAC teams in top 35, only 6 in top 50, USC & UCLA at 9 & 11
Only 5 Big 12 teams in top 50, with TX at 49, and TT 1st at #15
Worst: Purdue 62, IU 66, Utah 69, WSU 69, Syracuse 69, Kansas 72, GT 75, BYU 77, KSU 84, Colorado 90, U Conn 96,
LikeLike
It’s way too early to mean much. Some classes are much larger than others.
LikeLike
Matt Hinton has a great article for Grantland on Southern Mississippi football: Eagle Rocked: Southern Miss, Conference USA, and the Dark Side of College Football Realignment
Once upon a time, and it wasn’t that long ago, Southern Miss was an over-achieving mid-major, once coming within a whisker of a BCS bid, and occasionally toppling P5 opponents like Alabama, Oklahoma State, and Nebraska. But now they’re in a heavily denuded Conference USA, where even a winning record wouldn’t impress anyone these days.
In fact, Southern Miss is the only remaining charter member of Conference USA. A conference that once included Louisville, Cincinnati, South Florida, and TCU, has taken a big step downward, as all of the other original schools left for greener pastures, while many others came and went.
Indeed, instability is the hallmark of a mid-major conference. The Sun Belt likewise has only one original member (South Alabama). And the American has only one of the original football-playing members of the Big East (UConn). The Mountain West still has a number of its original members, but it’s a fairly young conference (1999).
That leaves only the MAC as a comparative bastion of stability among the mid-majors: nine of its members have been in that league since 1973 or earlier.
LikeLike
The Sun Belt isn’t really the Sun Belt. The Belt was down to three members (South Alabama, Western Kentucky, Jacksonville) and incoming member Arkansas-Little Rock. Jim Lessig took over as commissioner from Vic Bubas in 1990 and the two approached the NCAA to get permission for a solution because it appeared the American South might take WKU and possibly Jacksonville (to help Central Florida).
The NCAA ruled that if another league would take all the Sun Belt members that league would also get the Sun Belt’s units.
The American South took the deal and let Lessig go and Craig Thompson was the commissioner of the league and changed the sign on the door at the league HQ in New Orleans.
They kept the league TV deal which led to UCF leaving because it conflicted with the regional deal UCF had made. They all ended up in court when Sports Channel Florida and Sunshine claimed the right to telecast Jacksonville at UCF. Court split the baby and both carried it.
UCF asked to withdraw over the TV deal. AState UL Lafayette and La Tech were already miffed at UCF for delaying their planned move to I-A indefinitely so they were released immediately.
AState and ULL are the only remaining American South in the league.
On the football side the Sun Belt has five initial football members but only AState, ULL and ULM have played every season.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“Matt Hinton has a great article for Grantland on Southern Mississippi football: Eagle Rocked: Southern Miss, Conference USA, and the Dark Side of College Football Realignment”
It’s a solid piece, but I have a few quibbles with it.
Southern Miss stands on the other side of the realignment divide as arguably the only FBS program that occupies a lower rung in the national pecking order than it did 15 or even five years ago
Really? Over 5 years, I think UConn, UC and USF clearly win that title. They were AQ teams in 2010 and are G5 teams now.
Over 15 years, how about Temple (from AQ to G5)? Idaho and NMSU aren’t thrilled either.
Still, it doesn’t require a mind-numbing trip to the glory days to recognize that the forces driving realignment have been especially rough on Conference USA. When it was formed, in 1995, the league was the Southern answer to the Big East, uniting a handful of long-standing, similarly situated programs in response to new economic realities that had made independence untenable for any school that wasn’t Notre Dame.
But the BE was a major league (a true hoops power and an AQ in football). CUSA never was that.
Right out of the gate, C-USA rivaled the WAC as the best of the second-tier, non-BCS leagues.
That’s a much better comparison.
Still, it doesn’t require a mind-numbing trip to the glory days to recognize that the forces driving realignment have been especially rough on Conference USA. When it was formed, in 1995, the league was the Southern answer to the Big East, uniting a handful of long-standing, similarly situated programs in response to new economic realities that had made independence untenable for any school that wasn’t Notre Dame.3 Right out of the gate, C-USA rivaled the WAC as the best of the second-tier, non-BCS leagues.
The complete lack of context makes these numbers meaningless.
2013 conference/division rankings by Sagarin:
1-9 P5s
10 AAC
11-12 MWC
13 Independents (ND and BYU)
14 CUSA W
17 CUSA E (3 points lower)
It sounds a little better to say CUSA was the third best G5 conference, not far behind the AAC and MWC, doesn’t it? In 2014 CUSA topped the AAC and was basically tied with the MWC. What more can they expect?
“Once upon a time, and it wasn’t that long ago, Southern Miss was an over-achieving mid-major, once coming within a whisker of a BCS bid, and occasionally toppling P5 opponents like Alabama, Oklahoma State, and Nebraska. But now they’re in a heavily denuded Conference USA, where even a winning record wouldn’t impress anyone these days.”
USM has always been a good program, with a career W% of 0.594. They helped start CUSA in 1996. They were well into Jeff Bower’s tenure as HC (1991-2007). Bower became their all-time winningest coach and then was replaced by Larry Fedora (2008-2011). The team fell apart in 2012 when Ellis Johnson took over (12-2 in 2011 to 0-12 in 2012) and struggled again in 2013 under new coach Todd Monken (1-11). They won 3 games last year, so they might be coming back. A bad hire can do that to you. I think 3 bad seasons is too little to form a judgement. Being in the weak CUSA should help them recover, so blaming realignment seems odd.
LikeLike
The situation has changed for USM. They had a run from 1994 to 2011 without a losing season. Since 1994 counting Charlotte there are 22 more FBS schools and 18 are in the CUSA footprint. Toss in La Tech joining CUSA, AState and UL Lafayette becoming much more competitive and USM faces much more competition.
None of that compares though to losing Fedora who built a team based on speed, tempo and the spread where the average age of the head coach and coordinators was 48 and replacing them with a head coach and coordinators with an average age of 58 and trying to build a run between the tackles team.
USM ditched what produced a 12-2 season and started over. Just a bizarre decision.
Realignment may have frustrated fans but not the way that shotgun blast in the foot of a hire did.
LikeLike
http://www.ncaa.com/news/wrestling/article/2015-06-23/ohio-st-wrestler-kyle-snyder-skip-season-shot-rio-olympics
Kyle Snyder was national runner-up as a freshman last year for OSU in wrestling. He’ll redshirt this season to prepare for the 2016 Olympics tryouts instead. He made the world championships team by beating the reigning Olympic champ and will hope to repeat his success in the Olympic trials.
“Kyle is the first collegiate athlete in NCAA history to win the U.S. Open and make the World Team as a freshman,” Ohio State head coach Tom Ryan said. “The best chance for him to win an Olympic gold medal is to spend this season building his strength and freestyle skill. Traveling overseas will be critical for Kyle as well.”
It’s great for the guy, but a real blow for OSU’s shot to repeat as champs.
LikeLike
I’m not a huge fan of the Oly RS, but makes some sense in this case. This year Kyle managed to win the U.S. open and the world team trials while competing scholastically. However, there was over a couple months between NCAAs and those events to heal, refocus, and increase his weight from the college 197 to the international wt of 213. There will be around three weeks between 2016 NCAAs and Olympic trials. Not much time to recover and retool his body.
LikeLike
Yeah, I certainly don’t begrudge him the opportunity. It just stinks for OSU this year.
This is another example of a school doing what’s best for an athlete and not getting any recognition for it. All we hear about are the poor put-upon revenue athletes who are so “abused.”
LikeLike
LikeLike
Boren also said without explicitly naming it that the Longhorn Network—which keeps the Big 12 from having a conference network like the SEC, Big 10 and Pac 12—is a big problem for the conference.
“The elephant in the room remains the network south of us that has struggled and has in a way as long as it’s there,” Boren said. “And we have done quite well with our network and if anything ever changed, it has value to it which we see. But someday, maybe we’ll get past that other problem as well. It’s a problem.”
Boren said the problem of reduced revenue per school with expansion wasn’t as big of a hurdle as it had been made out to be.
“The contract says that our main television contract … if we grow from 10 to 11 or 11 to 12, their payments to us grow proportionally,” Boren said. “So everybody’s share stays the same. If it’s ‘X’ dollars, it stays ‘X’ dollars.
“Our main media contract says it’s not the same pie now cut 12 ways instead of 10.”
Boren did say that that only includes the primary television contract, not other revenue that is split between the schools.
http://newsok.com/boren-big-12-should-strive-for-12-team-league/article/5429694
LikeLike
If Boren’s right, then the financial bar to clear is much lower than previously thought. However, for a truly revenue neutral addition, a team will have to increase the value of the TV contract to make up for splitting CFP, etc money. Not a simple as some will make it sound.
LikeLike
Still not many good choices. BYU and UC are the best available full members. Maybe Boise and BYU for football only to save on travel for non-revenue sports and maintain the double round robin in hoops? Would UC consider football only and put their other sports elsewhere?
LikeLike
It was pretty much widely assumed already that this is what most contracts had in their deals. The Big Ten had it when it went from 11 to 12 and then 12 to 14. Same for the SEC all though they obviously renegotiated their deal with ESPN shortly thereafter.
LikeLike
As I recall, the Big 10 didn’t get anything for Nebraska, only the money for the CCG (which paid for them). Both the SEC and ACC renegotiated their deals. They had “look-ins,” not guarantees.
That clause has long been thrown around by bloggers and message board posters but ultimately seemed to come from one source-a poster on the UConn Boneyard who claimed to be a TV consultant. So I doubted it.
LikeLike
Bowlsby confirmed that the clause does exist.
LikeLike
Plus, adding 1 and a conference championship game would probably financially make it revenue neutral or positive overall to add 1 team right now. The counter-argument is they’ve been thinking about a CCG regardless.
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/06/24/big-12-expansion-conference-realignment-oklahoma-david-boren
Andy Staples looks at the options for the B12.
LikeLike
The Staples article really underscores how weak the 12th candidates are, if we assume that BYU is likely the 11th. None of them really sets the pulse racing, and even BYU is not without its issues (e.g., Sunday scheduling).
There are at least two other important points, and perhaps three, that he does not make. One is that each expansion makes the next expansion harder. For instance, if you think Florida State might be available in the mid-2020s, you might not want to take USF or UCF now — because then you’d be looking potentially for a 14th school to partner with the Seminoles, and maybe you don’t want 14. This is why it’s preferable not to rush expansion, if you don’t have to.
The second problem is that the more schools they add, the less access to Texas the non-Texas schools will likely have. This means that an expansion probably has to be a lot better than just revenue-neutral, to secure approval. You can see why Boren, of all people, would not be worried about this, since the annual Red River Rivalry game is certain to be preserved in any scheduling format. But the other non-TX schools probably will care about it a lot more.
Lastly, it is hard to come up with rational, and not ridiculously unbalanced, divisions in the Big XII. (This was one of the biggest problems in the old Big XII — and they had Nebraska to balance the TX/OK division.) CCG deregulation could solve this problem, as divisions would no longer be required, but no one has worked out the details of scheduling in a 12-team P5 league without divisions. Staples points out that if the Big XII can have a championship game with 10 members, then there is even less of a reason to expand than there was before.
LikeLike
It wouldn’t be that hard to balance the divisions (assuming an expansion to the east):
EAST
West Virginia
Cincinnati
UCF/USF/Memphis
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
WEST
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Baylor
TCU
Texas Tech
The EAST would have the bigger brand names, less dead weight, and would be stronger overall if Texas returns to glory but the WEST (with three teams in Texas) would always be able to field talented teams. The separation between EAST and WEST isn’t anywhere near the old Big 12 NORTH and SOUTH or the current B1G East and West. Of course this alignment basically comes down to whether Texas wants to be separated from Baylor and/or Texas Tech.
LikeLike
Marc – that’s why the B-12 ought to go with football-only members as I’ve advocated for years. Take BYU and Boise and give them $10 million each with proceeds from the CCG, with their membership concurrent with the expiration of the GOR. That way the B-12 could kick them to the curb if somebody better comes along in ten years. BYU and Boise would take that deal in a heartbeat and the B-12 all-sports members would at least break even.
LikeLike
Alan from Baton Rouge,
“Marc – that’s why the B-12 ought to go with football-only members as I’ve advocated for years. Take BYU and Boise and give them $10 million each with proceeds from the CCG, with their membership concurrent with the expiration of the GOR. That way the B-12 could kick them to the curb if somebody better comes along in ten years. BYU and Boise would take that deal in a heartbeat and the B-12 all-sports members would at least break even.”
Certainly that option has to be on the table, as I said above. As long as they insist on UT and OU being together, though, the divisions are unbalanced.
West:
Boise
BYU
TT
TCU
Baylor
WV
East:
ISU
KS
KSU
TX
OU
OkSU
Maybe they should consider UCF and USF as a pair. That gives another big state for the footprint, WV gets a better recruiting territory, and loss of TX access isn’t so bad.
West:
TT
TCU
Baylor
TX
OU
OkSU
East:
ISU
KS
KSU
WV
UCF
USF
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25224733/want-to-join-the-big-12-now-is-the-time-to-invest-in-your-sports
It’s important to note: Expansion would mean the Big 12 would have to share other league revenue 12 ways instead of 10. That means further dividing money from the College Football Playoff, other bowls and the NCAA Tournament — real money some Big 12 schools won’t want to lose without getting enough value in return from new members.
Bowlsby said that the portion of divided Big 12 money represents about 40 percent of current conference revenue. The Big 12 announced last month that it distributed $252 million to its 10 members for the 2014-15 school year.
Roughly 100 million is divided. That share would go from 10 to 8.33
There’s a line of thinking among some lower-budget Big 12 schools that the 10-member conference has incredibly helped their television exposure. Instead of playing some important football and basketball games on a conference network, some Big 12 schools are getting more attention than ever by playing on ESPN and Fox.
[snip]
But the 10-team, round-robin model is working nicely to help the brands of some lower-tiered schools.
There’s not a lot of sexy additions out there to make up for a year of missing Texas or Oklahoma.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13135918/bo-jackson-charles-barkley-duo-tops-list-best-combined-college-football-basketball-seasons
With the NBA draft coming up, a look at the best pairs of top FB and top MBB players from the same academic year at the same school based on Melvin Gordon and Frank Kaminsky.
1. Bo Jackson and Charles Barkley, Auburn, 1983-84
2. Sam Bradford and Blake Griffin, Oklahoma, 2008-09
3. Gary Beban and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, UCLA, 1967-68
4. Herschel Walker and Dominique Wilkins, Georgia, 1980-81
5. Tim Tebow and Joakim Noah, Florida, 2006-07
6. Alex Smith and Andrew Bogut, Utah, 2004-05
7. Art Still and Jack “Goose” Givens, Kentucky, 1977-78
8. Tommy Casanova and “Pistol” Pete Maravich, LSU, 1969-70
9. Randy White and John Lucas, Maryland, 1974-75
10. Troy Smith and Greg Oden, Ohio State, 2006-07
Who did they miss out on?
One pair that occurred to me:
Bob Ferguson and Jerry Lucas, OSU 1961-62
OSU went 8-0-1 and won the FWAA national tile (#2 AP and Coaches). Ferguson won the Maxwell Award and UPI Player of the Year Award (#2 for the Heisman), and became the #5 pick in the NFL draft (#8 in the AFL draft) in 1962.
OSU went 26-2 in MBB and lost the national title game. They finished the regular season #1 in both polls. Jerry Lucas was named the USBWA College Player of the Year again (won it in 1960-61, too) and became the #6 pick in the NBA draft.
LikeLike
Tommy Casanova was a 3-time All American DB and The Pistol was the greatest college basketball player EVER. My Tigers ought to be in the top 5. It looks like there was too much emphasis on Heismans for my taste.
LikeLike
Herschel and Dominque blow away any pair but Auburn’s. And I think they top Bo and Charles, but its close.
LikeLike
They included team success in their criteria, which hurt UGA. MBB didn’t have an elite season. They didn’t even make the NCAA. They lost in round 2 of the NIT.
LikeLike
Somewhat off topic, but the best “duo” is CCNY, which won both the NIT and NCAA in 1950.
LikeLike
LSU picked up a Purdue QB transfer. I’m guessing he’ll just be a warm body, but with our QB luck, you never know.
http://theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/12721889-128/former-purdue-quarterback-danny-etling
LikeLike
http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index.ssf/2015/06/how_the_big_ten_is_affecting_the_porn_industry.html
The Sugar Bowl loss apparently drove AL fans to porn. Seriously. Pornhub.com claims a 90% increase over normal daily traffic after the AL loss.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/13142145/ncaa-proposes-new-nba-draft-rule-allow-underclassmen-return-school
The NCAA is proposing a new rule so players can declare for the draft but pull out after the pre-draft combine without losing eligibility. They still can’t hire an agent, of course, but at least they could test the waters more and get direct feedback from the NBA.
Under the proposal, which was a coordinated effort by the NCAA, the National Association of Basketball Coaches and the NBA, underclassmen would be allowed to attend the Chicago pre-draft combine in May, get evaluated by team personnel and given a true reading on their draft status. The players would then be able to decide if they wanted to stay in the draft or return to school. They couldn’t sign with an agent, though.
The current draft rules don’t allow a player to return to college once he officially declares for the NBA draft. The NBA would still have an early-entry deadline of late April and an official withdrawal date of 10 days before the draft, as per the collective bargaining agreement. But the NCAA would then have its own withdrawal date moved up from the week after the Final Four to sometime in mid-to-late May.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/82793/is-acc-headed-for-a-bleak-future
ESPN.com takes a look at the ACC’s future.
So if two of the most prominent teams in the league are dropping in the Future Power Rankings and only three are ranked in the top 25, is that a bad sign for the future of the ACC?
http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/82764/does-2015-bear-any-similarity-to-2013-for-florida-state
With a lot of talk about the ACC being the odd conference out of the CFP this year, ESPN looks at FSU as a darkhorse candidate by comparing them to 2013 FSU.
The most obvious comparisons are an easy schedule (UF is the only P5 OOC game) and a new but talented QB (Golson from ND).
Then came this tweet about W% versus P5 teams in the past 3 years:
Only 5 teams above 50% (one at 50%). 3 teams above 60% (all 3 above 77%, too), 3 teams below 30%. 3 teams averaged 9 P5 games per season, which is also sad if understandable for the weak teams.
LikeLike
http://www.ncaa.com/game/baseball/d1/2015/06/24/virginia-vanderbilt
The curse has been lifted. UVA beat Vandy 4-2 in the final game of the CWS to give the ACC their first title since WF in 1955.
LikeLike
Not only that, UVA will win the Capital One Cup (Men). They will jump OSU and Oregon if I read the scoring structure right – 60 points.
http://www.capitalonecup.com/#standings
They will also jump to 4th in the NACDA standings, ahead of any BIG school, all ACC teams (finally topping UNC), but behind 3 Pac12 schools.
LikeLike
Next curse to lift – a BIG school winning the Men’s Basketball Championship – good grief, not the delay of ACC baseball, but OSU, MSU, Ill, IU, Wi and MI have all struck out since 2000 in the title game.
LikeLike
UMD appears to be our best bet next season.
LikeLike
Hey, why not make it a double, with the women finally conquering the Evil Empire of Storrs?
LikeLike
If the Big Ten Conference ever goes to 16 I feel they should add Missouri and Pittsburgh giving rivalries between Illinois and Penn State. If the current Big East Conference ever expands to 12 schools I think they’d take 1 Midwestern school and 1 Eastern school. I personally don’t think they’ll expand beyond ten full members (they have 7 Associate members). If they add Saint Louis University from the Midwest and the University of Connecticut (they’d have to go back to FCS), it would give the league 12 members. As for the Horizon League they should add Belmont University (already a soccer affiliate) and their crosstown rival Lipscomb University to get to 12 full members. The Big 12 should add Cincinnati from The American and BYU from the West Coast Conference.
LikeLike
Pingback: No Shocker in Conference Realignment | FRANK THE TANK'S SLANT