The new college football season is finally upon us! Let’s get to some quick hits on college sports business news from the past few weeks:
(1) Sports TV Rights: Bubble or Not? – Even before the broader stock market swoon over the past two weeks, cable companies have been getting hammered by investors due to continued decline of the basic cable model due to cord cutting.
This potentially has a large impact on sports fans, particularly college sports fans, since so many off-the-field issues are directly related to cable rights fees for sporting events that have largely grown unfettered for the past decade. Conference realignment doesn’t happen if the Big Ten Network isn’t formed and becomes enormously successful. Major League Baseball, NBA and NHL franchises are buoyed from attendance peaks and valleys by massive regional sports network deals. The NFL receives more rights fees from ESPN for Monday Night Football and DirecTV for Sunday Ticket exclusivity than from its over-the-air network partners that are showing higher profile games than the former and are actually producing the games for the latter.
This begs the question that has been circulating quite a bit these days: is there a sports TV rights bubble that is about to pop?
It’s a lot more complex question than many observers give it credit for. On the one hand, cord cutting is accelerating with a major complaint being that non-sports fans are having to pay higher cable and satellite bills for sports networks that they do not watch. As a result, cable subscriptions rates are going down, which drags down the subscriber fees that networks such as ESPN depend upon. On the other hand, sports programming is one of the few (if not only) exclusive draws to cable and satellite television in the first place, so the relatively inelastic demand from sports fans is arguably even more important to cable networks than ever. In essence, when push comes to show, cable networks may rather lose the more price sensitive cord cutters than lose the higher paying sports fans.
Even with the impact of cord cutting becoming clearer in recent months, cable networks are still charging ahead with large sports rights deals. In early August, NBC and Comcast ponied up a 100% increase in rights for English Premier League games compared to the last deal that was signed only two years ago. The St. Louis Cardinals similarly just scored a doubling of its rights fees from Fox Sports Midwest on the regional sports network front.
It’s an interesting paradox: sports rights fees are arguably both the largest cause of cord cutting and the largest hedge against cord cutting. A non-sports fan is rightly going to question the wisdom of paying for cable when he or she can get the same lineup through a less expensive combination of Netflix, Amazon Prime and/or Hulu (plus maybe even HBO Now). By the same token, sports fans are more dependent upon cable than ever. Cable is no longer just a repository for surplus niche events, but now is the home (whether in whole or part) of the NCAA Tournament (including the Final Four), the College Football Playoff and nearly all bowls (including the bluest blue blood brand of the Rose Bowl), and MLB, NBA and NHL playoff games. More importantly, sporting events are exclusive and unique – a viewer can get news coverage as easily from an over-the-air network or Internet as he or she can from cable, but an over-the-air Ohio State game is not a replacement for a Michigan game for a Wolverines fan.
As a result, I don’t see complete doom and gloom for ESPN and sports networks in the future. For all of the alarmist articles about ESPN’s supposed impending demise over the past few weeks due to employee shuffling and Disney’s earnings reports, ESPN is still the single most valuable media and entertainment property on Earth. The reason why investors are scared isn’t because ESPN’s revenue and profit levels are bad, but rather that they have set such an insanely high bar financially that anything that deviates from that bar is worrisome. To put it into perspective, ESPN is still averaging about $6.61 per subscriber per month with over 92 million subscribers, which translates into $7.372 billion per year before they sell a single advertisement. That is over $614 million per month in just subscriber revenue (once again, we’re not even talking about the commercials that ESPN sells), which is more than the domestic gross of any movie released by Disney in history (and in fact, more than the domestic gross of any movie in history except for Avatar and Titanic). Just think about that: ESPN is generating revenue from just subscriptions that is more than what Disney grosses domestically from any Marvel, Star Wars or Frozen movie every single month… and once again, before they sell a single advertisement.
To be sure, the incredible amount of money that ESPN is generating that is propping up the entire Walt Disney Company (and national and regional sports networks are similarly propping up companies such as 21st Century Fox and Comcast) is exactly why investors are so spooked by any deterioration of the basic cable model. When Disney has been able to set ESPN on auto-pilot and generate more revenue than a new Star Wars movie without lifting a finger every month, both companies and investors start taking that seemingly endless cash flow for granted.* Still, there’s so much money at stake that cable networks are unlikely to stop investing in sports since they are what will keep such cable networks relevant regardless of whether the industry moves from a basic cable to a la carte or over the top environment. Hence, the Big Ten will still likely rake in massive record-setting cash for college sports deals when it signs its new TV contract(s) over the coming year.**
(* Speaking of Star Wars, Disney just announced that it is building a new Star Wars Land built at both Walt Disney World and Disneyland. I’ll admit that I’ve had schematics created in my head for a Star Wars Land ever since I was 3 years old with a Millennium Falcon ride and fully operational Death Star. So, this is as exciting to me as it is to my uber-Disneyphile sister.)
(** Just my semi-educated guess: look for the Big Ten to split its first tier rights between ESPN and Fox, where the ABC/ESPN package will effectively be the same as today, but the games that are currently on ESPN2/ESPNU/ESPNEWS getting sent over to Fox/FS1 with some provisions for better game picks if they are carried nationwide over-the-air. The BTN contract is locked-in going until the 2031-32 season, so that won’t be changing. I don’t believe that the Big Ten is truly interested in selling all of its rights to solely Fox, as exposure is still extremely important the conference in the same manner as the NFL. In fact, the NFL TV rights model is a good template for what the Big Ten wants to do, which is to ensure that it’s getting exposure and revenue from several of the top media players instead of just one.)
(2) House of the Rising Sun Belt Expansion (and Contraction?) – As much as the college football world is most interested in whether the Big 12 and/or its individual schools (i.e. Oklahoma) will decide to get back into hot conference realignment action, the Sun Belt has made the latest expansion move by adding Coastal Carolina as a new all-sports member. On paper, Coastal Carolina seems like a fairy good addition for a Group of Five non-power conference since it’s a school with a rising enrollment and solid TV market and recruiting location in the Myrtle Beach area. The Sun Belt may also be turning its focus back on being an all-sports conference as Commissioner Karl Benson has hinted at the league dropping football-only members Idaho and New Mexico State. Those two football programs might soon be joining the homeless UMass as independents against their will (unlike Notre Dame, BYU and Army). If that occurs, it’s going to be tough since there isn’t any natural home for those schools and independence is effectively a death sentence for those schools for more than a couple of years. UMass will be hoping for the AAC to lose a school or two to the Big 12, which would then open up a spot for them. In turn, that could open up other spots down the line for Idaho and New Mexico State. As much as the powers that be in college sports probably like the general slowdown in conference realignment, there are several schools out there that want and/or need chaos.
(3) Illini Coaching Dumpster Fire – As many of you know, I’m an Illinois alumnus and fan. I’ve seen enough dysfunction with Illini football over the years that I barely batted an eye when they fired their head coach only a week before the season opener. At a core level, Tim Beckman was a terrible football coach, awful in press conferences, disjointed with the media and, according to the evidence, abusive to his players. The question in my mind isn’t whether Tim Beckman should have been fired, as that was obvious to me after his first season in Champaign. Instead, the question is what the heck did Illinois Athletic Director Mike Thomas ever see in Beckman in the first place? If Beckman had an interview that was anything like his conversations with the media, what possessed Thomas to see anything in him? Let there be no doubt: this was a CYA firing by Mike Thomas, but the seat under his own “A” is going to be burning hot coal for awhile. To be fair, many of the non-revenue programs have seen quite a bit of success under Thomas, particularly volleyball, tennis, golf and baseball. However, football and men’s basketball are where power conference athletic directors are ultimately judged and Thomas has, at the very least, underachieved with both of them.
Here are my basic expectations for the Illinois football program: considering its location with access to the Chicago and St. Louis recruiting areas along with Big Ten membership, this team should at least be winning 6 to 8 games per year to consistently make it to bowl games while challenging for the weaker Big Ten West every 4 years or so when senior-laden teams cycle through. This shouldn’t be much to ask for. I’m not delusional in believing that Illinois should be having Ohio State-level success in football or becoming the dominant team in the Big Ten West. However, I also don’t buy some of the national narratives that Illinois football has to be inherently bad. Illinois is not like Indiana or Kansas where football will always be a placeholder until basketball season starts, so I’ll never accept the “Illinois is a basketball school” excuse for football ineptitude. (Besides, a top tier athletic department should have the ability to perform well in both football and basketball. See Ohio State, Michigan State and Wisconsin just in the Big Ten.) Instead, Illinois is simply a fairweather football school in the same manner as 90% of other college programs: they sell tickets when they win but fans won’t come out when they lose. The Illini football fan base is similar to the fan base of my Chicago White Sox – there are large numbers of us out there, yet we aren’t paying to watch a poor product like, say, Cubs fans have historically done. Illinois has made several terrible bad football decisions in the past, but there isn’t any structural reason why the school can’t have at least a competent football program. The immediate issue is that I don’t trust that Illinois will make a competent football decision until Mike Thomas is gone.
Of course, even with the turmoil surrounding Illinois football, I’m still pathological enough of a football fan to get excited for a Friday night game against Kent State. I’m fairly certain that my hopes and dreams for the Illini and Bears this year will be quickly crushed within the next 4 weeks, but until then, que sera, sera. Enjoy the games and holiday weekend!
(Image from News-Gazette)
FRANK THE TANK'S SLANT 
Hook ’em
LikeLike
{Type something witty here}
LikeLike
{…and don’t forgot to click on “Notify me…” you complete idiot}
LikeLike
Go Hawks!
LikeLike
Here are my basic expectations for the Illinois football program: considering its location with access to the Chicago and St. Louis recruiting areas along with Big Ten membership, this team should at least be winning 6 to 8 games per year to consistently make it to bowl games while challenging for the weaker Big Ten West every 4 years or so with senior-laden teams cycle through. This shouldn’t be much to ask for.
Illinois — the Maryland of the Central Time Zone (except it has no lacrosse, men’s soccer or equivalent of Brenda Frese).
LikeLike
Need a BSWB quarterback (think John Cooper to decode the acronym) – the position at UI tends to oscillate between an overated DuPage Valley bro and the next hood-based athletic mobile bruh.
LikeLike
About the Sunbelt possibly dropping Idaho and New Mexico State: I’d be particularly worried if I was Idaho. The Sunbelt may be fine with 2 football-only members. But if the agreements are coming up for renewal, why not drop Idaho for UMass? It doesn’t have the history at FBS that Idaho has, but surely there’s a bit more media value in New England, while probably being easier for travel. UMass might also be willing to agree to a few basketball games a year which would obviously be good for that sport.
LikeLike
m(Ag) & Frank – I’m not so sure about the Sunbelt kicking NM State and Idaho to the curb. The Sunbelt has two members that don’t play football (Arkansas-Little Rock & Texas-Arlington), so having two football-only members should be no big deal. Adding Coastal Carolina allows the Sunbelt to have 12 teams in all major sports, albeit a slightly different lineup for football. I haven’t heard anything about them running off UTAr or UALR. Idado and NM State may get the boot, but I doubt the reason is to make the Sunbelt an all-sports league.
LikeLike
I’ve seen suggestions that some of the Sun Belt West Division was in favor of having NMSU join all-sports, while the East Division schools are opposed. I suppose its possible for affiliate members to have travel subsidies carved out of the $1m CFP money per school to the conference, and they may not want to head all the way out to Las Cruces without that subsidy.
Adding Coastal Carolina suggests for FB an Eastern Division of Appy State, Coastal Carolina, Georgia State, Georgia Southern, Troy and South Alabama and a Western Division of Louisiana, ULM, Arkansas State, Texas State, NMSU and Idaho.
If they dropped Idaho in favor of UMass, that would seem like it would shift USA to the Western Division and have UMass in the East. If they carved out travel subsidies from the CFP money, that would also result in each division having an equal distribution of both long distance trips as well as travel subsidy.
LikeLike
Go Bucks and Rock Chalk too!
LikeLike
GO B1G
LikeLike
I remember the 80s when Illinois was always a threat to be a spoiler for the Buckeye’s season … IIRC, there was a stretch there when Illinois and OSU traded off wins in alternating seasons … and it seems that if the Badgers can establish a winning program just a little bit north of Chicagoland, with a quite challenging undergraduate academic level to navigate their FB players through, the Illini ought to be able to do so just a little bit south of Chicagoland.
Similar to Wisconsin, the Illini may need to become a “system” school to do so, recruiting FB athletes that fit their system well without necessarily being widely viewed as 4-star or 5-star recruits. But building that requires getting the coach that can build that kind of program.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“This begs the question that has been circulating quite a bit these days” … {sigh} … “begging a question” is making an assumption or assumptions that implies the conclusion to an argument on their own, so the evidence presented is just for decoration.
At the same time that people arguing on the internet has seen something of an epidemic of actually begging the question, there has also been such an epidemic of people using it as if it means “raising the question” that the majority of people use it as a synonym for “raise the question”.
Its an obscure enough phrase that its perfectly fine to not use it in its original meaning, but if intending to mean “raise the question” … “raise the question” is a perfectly fine way to say that. It does not really beg to be substituted.
LikeLike
In the early Cooper/Mackovic overlapping era, the Illini were a lock to beat OSU. Wisconsin seems to have a system which incorporates its in-state strengths (big lumberjack linemen, RBs from SE Wisconsin) on offense. Illinois always had the tough LBs (which may have run its course with Leman), but I wonder if what the local HS’s are putting out now are not better suited to run Northwestern U-type offenses. Illinois right now doesnt seem to maximizing the CCL and the other catholic schools (which is sort of the MSU formula).
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“I remember the 80s when Illinois was always a threat to be a spoiler for the Buckeye’s season … IIRC, there was a stretch there when Illinois and OSU traded off wins in alternating seasons …”
It was even worse than you recall. IL went 8-4 versus OSU from 1983-1994 including 5 straight wins from 1988-1992.
“Similar to Wisconsin, the Illini may need to become a “system” school to do so, recruiting FB athletes that fit their system well without necessarily being widely viewed as 4-star or 5-star recruits. But building that requires getting the coach that can build that kind of program.”
Boise and TT did the same thing.
What is the most popular style of offense in Chicagoland high schools? The spread? Triple option? Pro set? IL’s best bet would seem to be either a basketball on turf offense or the option since the other styles are covered by better programs. I think they could thrive with an option attack as the weather makes passing in November a bit questionable. On the other hand, PU made it work so IL could too.
LikeLike
I think they they should go up tempo spread. Indiana (at times) has shown how effective it can be despite limited talent (IU five year recruiting average: 55). IU’s defense remains awful so it hasn’t translated into wins but If you hire a good coach, Illinois could be in the top 30-35 of recruiting easy. I’m very surprised that more B1G teams (who are at an inherent talent disadvantage) don’t copy the Baylor (five year rank #39), ASU (#35), or IU hyper up tempo offenses.
LikeLike
Yeah, the key could well be to pair it with a defensive system that is effective at creating turnovers, since putting in a defense against an up tempo spread when they were not expecting to be going in is a “force multiplier”. But I don’t know the tendencies of central Illinois and Chicagoland areas as far as turning out defensive players go.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“It was even worse than you recall. IL went 8-4 versus OSU from 1983-1994 including 5 straight wins from 1988-1992.”
I must have been recalling 1982-1988, I went to graduate school in Knoxville in 1989 and was not following the Buckeyes as closely as I had before.
LikeLike
Go B1G Red
LikeLike
Whether or not cable networks continue breaking the bank for sports rights, the days of cable networks ponying up for high-profile, championship sports events that once seemed unthinkable to move to cable just ten years ago may be ending. (Note the British Open moving to NBC and returning to broadcast.) No sport wants to go the way of boxing, pushed to the background with their biggest events on pay-per-view or premium channels. ESPN has only been able to acquire rights like the College Football Playoff because they’re in the vast majority of households; if that ends, their ceiling becomes considerably lower. Take that away, and cable’s biggest non-NFL sporting events becomes MLB and NBA playoff games plus NASCAR races and college football bowl games. These agreements are locked up into the next decade, but I fully predict we’ll see at least the CFP championship game on ABC by the end of the current contract.
With a less attractive slate, ESPN would probably see its subscriber fees go down noticably, which means it’s less able to afford high-profile sporting events, which means lower subscriber fees, and so on. I’m not saying ESPN will ever go back to the days of Aussie Rules Football, but I do think the broken economics of the TV industry that give cable networks so much power to acquire high-profile sporting events are correcting themselves. To the extent broadcast doesn’t benefit from this, it’s as much because broadcast seems to be in the middle of completely self-destructing as because cable companies are trying to inoculate themselves from cord-cutting.
What we’re seeing is a complete paradigm shift in how media is consumed, where your internet connection effectively plays the same role as a cable subscription used to. Many cable companies also happen to be the dominant ISP, so they’re rather well set up to take advantage of cord-cutting, idiot investors aside. Cable companies are still in the stage where investors pay enough attention to traditional linear TV subscription rates that they try all sorts of tricks to keep those numbers up, but in the long term linear TV is more of a demand management system to prevent high-demand shows and events, especially live events, from swamping the system.
LikeLike
Geaux Tigers!
LikeLike
Worth noting: Throughout 2015, the monthly carriage fee income for ESPN and ESPN2 has decreased by ~$2.23 million every month, thanks to cord cutting and trimming. That might be a small percentage of ESPN’s overall carriage fee income, but it adds up in a hurry — ~$174 million in potential income vanishing in 2015, when compared to a steady sub rate over the course of the year. Not exactly Avengers money, but not something you can hide inside a balance sheet, either.
This is why ESPN didn’t bid on the Premier League, and why ESPN will look to split the Big Ten deal with Fox. You and I are on the same page as far as what we think will happen there. It makes the most sense for both, because the Big Ten is going to get about $250 million per year, and neither network can afford to pay out that full amount over the course of 10+ years.
I do think there’s an outside chance that CBS will try to sneak in as a partner with Fox to take the Big Ten deal away from ESPN. CBS has had a lot of success with SEC football, and it could convince Jim Delaney that it could do the same for the Big Ten. Not sure ESPN would let that happen, though.
LikeLike
I don’t think CBS would want any more than they have with the SEC, a game of the week.
I could see the B1G splitting their package into a Tier I game of the week and a package for the rest.
LikeLike
Though if CBS and Fox are going in together, two Tier 1 games with alternating picks is a big slice of the 3-4 games a week that ABC/ESPN currently take. And that does complement BigTen BBall on CBSSN, if CBS is angling to keep those.
LikeLike
What You Pay For Sports,
“Worth noting: Throughout 2015, the monthly carriage fee income for ESPN and ESPN2 has decreased by ~$2.23 million every month, thanks to cord cutting and trimming. That might be a small percentage of ESPN’s overall carriage fee income, but it adds up in a hurry — ~$174 million in potential income vanishing in 2015, when compared to a steady sub rate over the course of the year. Not exactly Avengers money, but not something you can hide inside a balance sheet, either.”
Advertising revenue for sports on TV has been rising, though. That counters some/most/all of this drop.
“This is why ESPN didn’t bid on the Premier League, and why ESPN will look to split the Big Ten deal with Fox.”
A lack of available TV windows may be a more important reason.
“You and I are on the same page as far as what we think will happen there. It makes the most sense for both, because the Big Ten is going to get about $250 million per year, and neither network can afford to pay out that full amount over the course of 10+ years.”
http://www.jconline.com/story/sports/college/purdue/football/2014/04/25/big-ten-schools-expecting-big-payouts-continue/8187133/
The Big Ten is projecting that schools will make about $33M per school per year just from TV in 2017-8. That’s roughly $400M per year for the 12 schools getting the full payout (RU and UMD will be getting adjusted amounts). Since the BTN deal isn’t changing much, I’m guessing the tier 1 deal is expected to be more than $300M per year to start.
“I do think there’s an outside chance that CBS will try to sneak in as a partner with Fox to take the Big Ten deal away from ESPN. CBS has had a lot of success with SEC football, and it could convince Jim Delaney that it could do the same for the Big Ten. Not sure ESPN would let that happen, though.”
I could see the B10 trying to get a prime time game of the week package. That would probably require some combo of ABC, CBS and FOX to find enough slots. Beyond that, I think the B10 wants to stay on ESPN but might move the ESPNU/ESPNEWS games to FS1. Maybe even the ESPN2 games except reverse mirrors, too.
LikeLike
I’d be surprised if the next Big Ten deal is worth $300 million a year or more, given the current environment. Ad money might be growing, but if that growth has to make up for a loss of revenue elsewhere, it will surely be reflected in the offer the networks make to the Big Ten. ESPN and Fox can only pay rising rights fees for so long if their own income remains flat.
I also think a lot more games will move to broadcast TV in the next deal, and ESPN might end up leveraging ABC more, much like they’re starting to do with the NBA. Fox would do the same with its broadcast network. That might be enough to push CBS out of the picture — although if the Big Ten really wants $300M/year, it will probably have to get all three networks on board somehow.
LikeLike
You seriously think the B1G will only average 600k more per school than the PAC in a deal struck 6 years later? And that is with the PAC holding back more inventory for the P12N than the B1G does with BTN.
LikeLike
The current environment could well prevent the deal from coming in north of expectations, but there is going to be competition for the rights, and the winning bid is not going to be able to get away with under pricing it on today’s market value due to concerns about how the value will be monetized in the out years.
LikeLike
“I do think there’s an outside chance that CBS will try to sneak in as a partner with Fox to take the Big Ten deal away from ESPN.”
I don’t think that would happen. However, I could see CBS & ESPN partnering up in a different way. CBS could license more SEC games from ESPN, giving CBS a few more primetime games and a selection of early games throughout the year. ESPN would then have extra time slots & cash to bid to get the entire Big Ten package themselves.
Why might this happen?
-CBS & ESPN have negotiated several agreements over the SEC recently, so they can work together. I believe CBS sub-licenses basketball games from ESPN. CBS & ESPN had to come to some agreements to get the SEC network started. And just this offseason, ESPN sub-licensed SEC football games to CBS for the first 2 weeks of the season (CBS previously aired US Open Tennis the first 2 weeks of the season, so their contract with the SEC doesn’t cover these 2 weeks).
-CBS would get more games that get good ratings & could stay focused on one conference.
-ESPN would be able to keep Big Ten games off it’s cable competitors (FS1 & NBCsports). CBS promoting SEC football also doesn’t hurt it’s interest in the SEC Network.
I’m not saying it’s likely to happen, but it could be something ESPN is contemplating.
LikeLike
We are …
LikeLike
Imagine that … 🙂
LikeLike
Imagine that … 🙂
Adam Schefter (Verified) @AdamSchefter
Five times in today’s 40-page ruling, Judge Berman put quotation marks around “independent” in reference to Ted Wells’ investigation.
11:20 AM – 3 Sep 2015
LikeLike
Oops. I apologize for the double post. It was unintentional.
LikeLike
Go Bucks.
LikeLike
Naming rights apparently are not under threat from cord cutters.
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/uw-husky-football/uw-alaska-airlines-agree-to-naming-rights-deal-for-husky-stadium/
LikeLike
The name goes out over whatever media people use to access the sports coverage … even non-legit ones.
LikeLike
http://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/wolverines/2015/09/04/michigan-football-tv-ratings-utah/71720022/
MI at Utah set a ratings records for CFB on FS1.
According to Fox, the game posted a 1.73 Nielsen household rating (2.868 million viewers), Fox Sports 1’s biggest college football number in its brief history.
FS1’s previous record was a 2013 game between Oregon and rival Oregon State, which drew 2.179 million viewers (a 1.35 rating).
But going against the behemoth ESPN, it wasn’t quite the same impact as ESPN’s primary game from the night, North Carolina-South Carolina, which earned a 2.1 rating. That ties ESPN’s fifth-highest Thursday night opener in the past decade or so.
A blog called sportstvratings.com posted more details, placing the U-M game as the second-most watched of the night, behind the UNC-SC game, which had 3.6 million with its game concluding within East Coast primetime (5:54-8:19 p.m.). U-M’s game ran from 8:29-11:50 p.m. Eastern time.
I know they hyped the heck out of that game and it was Harbaugh’s first game for them, but it was 2 unranked teams that aren’t rivals playing OOC late on a weeknight. Drawing 80% of ESPN’s ratings is great. They have to be excited about bringing that number into the negotiations with the B10.
LikeLike
http://www.foxsports.com/presspass/latestnews/2015/09/04/michigan-utah-is-record-setter-for-fs1
Fox’s press release about this.
LikeLike
Too bad Michigan lost.
LikeLike
For the second time in slightly more than three months, a Maryland team has knocked off top-ranked UCLA — but this time, it came at home (before a record Ludwig Field crowd of 8,449) and it didn’t come in baseball, but men’s soccer, as the #6 Terps edged the Bruins 2-1 in OT: http://www.testudotimes.com/2015/9/4/9263819/mens-soccer-maryland-2-ucla-1-ot
Later today, I’ll be in Pasadena to see another UCLA team — football — take on Virginia.
LikeLike
The issue may be in what splitting it all up means
Disney can sell 2 opposite dimensions and use 1 to leverage the other right now. If given the chance I would drop 95% to 99% of the channels out there and the Disney ones would be the first to go. I have less desire to watch pro sports of any kind on TV and find that moving to year round college sports is filling my viewing time. Add a movie channel and some educational stuff and that is all I really watch.
Sure I want to watch ESPN on the weekend but I have pretty much turned off any of their talking head programs. Reality shows and blocks of 1/2 hour infomercials has turned me off. So has broadcasting a 2 hour movie that now fills 4 hours with commercials. Even the IFC channel has moved from uncut movies to all these dumb shows. I feel they should be paying me to watch this many commercials.
If my electricity costs 50 dollars a month but my cable costs 100 dollars a month we have a real problem. The question of a bubble is not “if” but “when”
LikeLike
B10W will be a dogfight.
Any one of 5 teams can win it.
LikeLike
Some schools probably already hoping next season is better. PSU lost to Temple (10-27) for the first time in 40 games (since 1941) . Kansas gave SD St its first FBS win (38-41). Texas looking at another down year after getting blasted by Notre Dame 3-38. WSU loss to Portland St. (17-24) at home edges out CO loss to HI (20-28) on the road. Vanderbilt lost to W. Kentucky (12-14).
LikeLike
I note Iowa State’s 31-7 win over Northern Iowa came before a record crowd of 61,500 in Ames (seats were put in the south end zone during the off-season). If ISU attendance is regularly 55K+ over the next 10 years, it should find a home in a P5 conference (probably an enlarged ACC) even if the Big 12 collapses a decade or so from now.
LikeLike
They’re in the B12.
LikeLike
?
LikeLike
But if the next wave of realignment turns the P5 into the P4, there’s been talk ISU could be left by the wayside if the Big 12, and not the ACC, is the conference whose future is doomed. Solid football attendance in Ames might prevent that from happening.
LikeLike
Good for ISU, but 61,500 seats is just average by CFB standards (even assuming they always sell out), and sports revenue today is driven mostly by factors other than gate attendance.
In population, Iowa ranks 30th among the 50 states. (Only eight P5 programs reside in states with less population.) And Iowa State doesn’t have much of a national following; they have practically none.
If there’s a contraction in the P5, and Iowa State wants to stay at the big boys’ table, they would need more to offer than just a sold-out stadium. They’d need a winning program, sustained over a period of time.
LikeLike
So much will depend upon who goes where, assuming it’s the Big 12 that implodes and not the ACC. I sense the only other conference where ISU could land would be the ACC, and so much of that might depend upon if the ACC itself is raided and how much of it is taken.
LikeLike
If this new guy is does things in the Mitch Daniels way…maybe IA state steps in for the Hawkeyes:
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/09/04/appointment-businessman-bruce-harreld-next-u-iowa-president-upsets-faculty
LikeLike
The guy looks like a terrible pick. But that’s a bit like saying the University of Michigan would give up athletics, just because it picked an Athletic Director (Dave Brandon) with a corporate mentality. No: after realizing that didn’t work, they got rid of the Athletic Director.
LikeLike
Odd week for the Big 10. The bottom 7 went 6-1. The top 7 are 1-5 with Ohio St. still to play.
LikeLike
bullet,
“Odd week for the Big 10. The bottom 7 went 6-1. The top 7 are 1-5 with Ohio St. still to play.”
Part of that is who they played, but also maybe people are wrong about who the top 7 are and who the bottom 7 are. While the top few and bottom few seemed fairly clear coming into the season, the rest was a jumble to me.
My attempt to match your levels:
Top 7:
OSU
MSU (WMU – W)
MN (TCU – L)
WI (AL – L)
NE (BYU – L)
MI (Utah – L)
PSU (Temple – L)
Bottom 7 (1 ranked foe, 2 G5 foes, 4 I-AA foes):
NW (Stanford – W)
PU (Marshall – L)
IL (Kent St – W)
IA (IL St – W)
IN (SIU – W)
RU (Norfolk St – W)
MD (Richmond – W)
The top 7 played 2 top 5 teams, 2 other P5 teams and 2 G5 teams that are decent. The bottom 7 faced 1 ranked foe (that shouldn’t have been ranked), 2 G5 teams and 4 I-AA teams. Only PSU was an upset loss for the top 7.
LikeLike
Agree with Brian.
Even if you rank Wisconsin 3rd after OSU and MSU, not sure how you decided which ones of UNL, Minny, NU, PSU, Iowa, and UMich are in the top 7 and which are in the bottom 7.
I reckon that will clear up only after they play each other.
LikeLike
The Atlanta Falcons and the SEC ink a deal that keeps the SEC CG in Atlanta forever.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sec-championship-remains-atlanta-least-2026-152904523–ncaaf.html
LikeLike
It would be nice to see them at least play that game outdoors at Nissan Stadium (Nashville). The first portion of that deal expires after the GOR era, so that leaves them room to experiment with Charlotte (+UNC/#16), Houston, a FL city or St.Louis (+OK/KU) (if they get a replacement for the Rams and the new stadium is built).
LikeLike
The new stadium will have a retractable roof (actually works more like a camera shutter). They could choose to play in the open air in nice weather.
The SEC loves Atlanta for it’s centrality and the ease of travel to and from it. Also, the CFB Hall of Fame is now in Atlanta and they want to plant their SEC flag on it. I doubt they’ll leave unless the Falcons force them out.
LikeLike
Coaches poll is out.
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/polls?poll=3&week=2
By conference:
SEC (9) #2 Bama, #7 Auburn, #9 UGA, #14 Ole Miss, #15 LSU, #18 Arkansas, #19 A&M, #21 Mizzou & #23 Tennessee
Pac-12 (5) #5 Oregon, #10 USC, #13 UCLA, #20 Arizona & #25 Utah
B1G (3) #1 Ohio State, #6 Michigan State & #24 Wisconsin
Big-12 (3) #3 TCU, #4 Baylor & #17 Oklahoma!
ACC (3) #8 Florida State, #12 Clemson & #16 GA Tech
Ind. #11 Notre Dame
MWC. #22 Boise State
LSU’s cancelled game against McNeese St. this past Saturday due to lightning was the first LSU game cancelled since the entire 1918 season was cancelled due to WWI. Now my Tigers’ season opener is this weekend in beautiful StarkVega$ Mississippi. The last time LSU opened the season on the road against an SEC opponent was 2007 with a 45-0 shutout over Miss State. LSU won its second BCS title that season. Also, since 2003, LSU has made or won the title game every four years (03, 07 & 11).
While it doesn’t really feel like our year right now, who am I to stand in the way of the football gods?
LikeLike
If the McNeese game does not get rescheduled, how does a 12-0 (as opposed to a 13-0) LSU team impact a 12-0 BigXII champion bid. It would seem to put them on a level ground in which you might have to take both as a bloc versus taking only 1 12-winner and taking a one-loss team.
I would also think the McNeese vacancy helps with strength-of-schedule.
LikeLike
LSU drops a tomato can opponent. Depends how the B12 team schedule compares.
LikeLike
That tomato can (McNeese State) almost dropped Nebraska last season. That game was tied with 20 seconds left in the 4th.
LikeLike
Was intended as support, not derisive. SOS, OOC comparison was my point.
LikeLike
urban – dropping a 1-AA team doesn’t level the playing field between LSU and a B-12 champ. Unless the B-12 turns out to be a lot tougher and the SEC a lot easier than everyone thinks, LSU would still have a great scheduling advantage with its conference games. If LSU were to win the SEC, my Tigers would have to beat #2 Bama, #7 Auburn, #14 Ole Miss, #18, Arkansas, #19 A&M, #26 Miss State, and either #9 Georgia, #21 Mizzou, or #23 Tennessee in the SEC CG. TCU may have already played its toughest game until the Friday after Thanksgiving when it plays Baylor. Also, looking at OOC, LSU plays at ACC Syracuse, and host SunBelt favorite Western Kentucky (who did beat Vandy this past weekend), and MAC Eastern Michigan. TCU beat B1G Minnesota, and plays G5 SMU, and 1-AA Stephen F. Austin. Baylor beat G5 SMU, plays G5 Rice, and 1-AA Lamar. If it comes down to LSU versus a B-12 champ for the final spot, with both being 12-0 or 11-1, I like my Tigers’ chances.
LikeLike
I agree, but if both are 12-0, the B12 champ will only get left out if the ACC, B1G, and PAC champs are all 13-0. An undefeated B12 champ may be the FSU of this year’s playoffs. Even if the consensus is they do not belong, there is no easy way to exclude an undefeated P5 champ.
LikeLike
The SEC plays the same non conference teams As every other conference.
Toledo and Jacksonville St. proved mouths should be closed.
The only advantage the SEC has that no other conference can beat 0.1 grade point averages.
LikeLike
urban – the game won’t be rescheduled. That’s why I wrote cancelled. LSU has had to reschedule many games, including moving venues due to hurricanes, but this is the first game since WWI, that has been cancelled. No makeup. At least I’ll get a credit on my season tickets next season.
LikeLiked by 1 person
They could have chosen to play on Sunday with no fans but opted not to do it. I can understand why, but MS St will benefit a little from having a game under their belts (probably not enough to win the game, though).
LikeLike
Both teams have conference games this week. Also, McNeese had no hotel rooms. They planned on bussing back to Lake Charles after the game. Lake Charles is about two and a half hours away from Baton Rouge. Neither team was interested in playing on Sunday.
LSU is honoring the $500k check to McNeese as well as refunding all the fans who purchased tickets.
LikeLike
If the McNeese game does not get rescheduled, how does a 12-0 (as opposed to a 13-0) LSU team impact a 12-0 BigXII champion bid. It would seem to put them on a level ground in which you might have to take both as a bloc versus taking only 1 12-winner and taking a one-loss team.
They were going to get zero credit for beating McNeese — but any game, even against the proverbial tomato can, is one that they could theoretically lose, or win unimpressively. This means that, perversely, the cancellation helps them, because the latter two possibilities are off the table, whereas the expected outcome (a walk-over) was never going to help their playoff case anyway.
There is practically no believable scenario in which an undefeated P5 team (or Notre Dame) is left out of the playoff. The only interesting scenarios are just like last year, where there are more 1-loss conference champions than playoff spots. It is hard to imagine a 1-loss SEC winner losing a strength-of-schedule argument against anybody, and even a 2-loss champ could push out 1-loss champs from other leagues.
LikeLike
“It is hard to imagine a 1-loss SEC winner losing a strength-of-schedule argument against anybody…”
Correct. That has been decided with preseason polls…
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
So is the AP poll.
OSU stays unanimous #1.
SEC – 10 (MS St also made it)
P12 – 5
ACC, B12 – 3
B10 – 2 (also have #26 WI and #28 NW)
Other – 2 (ND, Boise)
LikeLike
So should David Boren have said everybody but the SEC is at a psychological disadvantage?
AP is certainly sold on the SEC.
LikeLike
I think 7-8 SEC schools should be in the top 25, but 10 is overkill:
#25 Miss State looked unimpressive against a CUSA opponent that went 3-9 a year ago, yet they rise into the top 25?
#23 Tennessee put up 59 against BGSU but still gave up over 500 yards of offense. They won the game (although in not as lopsided a manner that the score would indicate) so I wouldn’t move them down and they were previously #25, but an increase of two spots?
#21 Missouri moves up three spots after winning 38-3 against an FCS team? Again, I wouldn’t move them down after starting at #24 but is that much more impressive than Iowa beating the FCS runner up 31-14 or Illinois winning 52-3 against Kent State or Rutgers winning 63-13 over another FCS team?
In my opinion, Wisconsin and Arizona State both have a case that they should be ranked ahead/instead of these three SEC schools, all of which would have lost to Alabama or A&M at “neutral” sites. Northwestern beat a ranked Stanford team, they should be in the top 25. After all, Utah beat an unranked Michigan and is now in the top 25. BYU went on the road and beat a power 5 team (granted on a hail mary), but only TCU and Ohio State did the same. They should be ranked.
Long story short, glad that we now have a committee in charge of things.
LikeLike
I don’t worry about week 1 polls. At least wait until after 4 games or so to see who isn’t getting enough credit and who is overrated.
LikeLike
Toledo-Stony Brook got cancelled at halftime. Georgia-ULM got called with 10 minutes left and I read that nobody in the stadium could even see the lightning (but it was on radar).
Definitely a lot more regard for safety. I remember going to a Georgia-Florida game in Jacksonville in the 90s, getting drenched by the torrent while wading through a foot of water in the parking lots with lightning in the distance, figuring we would be among the few in the stadium. And we got to our seats just before kickoff and virtually every seat was already full. No delays. Heavy rain most of the game and lightning in the distance for a good part.
LikeLike
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/9/8/9270871/bowl-projections-college-football-playoff-predictions-2015
A CFP projection:
Orange – 1. OSU vs 4. ND
Cotton – 2. AL vs 3. TCU
If those were the correct teams and seeds, shouldn’t the sites be reversed so TCU doesn’t get an advantage over AL? The site is irrelevant for OSU vs ND, so giving AL the edge over TCU should be the priority.
LikeLike
From Birmingham, Jerryworld is 150 miles closer than Miami. Alabama has done fairly well playing there also. Maybe TX is considered as much of a SEC state as FL now. TCU is only about 20 miles away, but at least half the stadium would be in Red in an AL-TCU matchup. Now If LSU was the SEC champ the entire stadium would be in Purple.
LikeLike
My projections:
Cotton: 1. ‘Bama vs. 4. MSU
Orange: 2. OSU vs. 3. Oregon
LikeLike
Brian – there is no way TCU has a home field advantage against Alabama in Jerry World for a playoff game. In 2013, LSU played TCU in the Cowboys Classic and my Tigers had a decided advantage. In the 2011 BCS NCG in New Orleans, LSU only had a bout a 60/40 advantage on Bama.
TCU has great fans but not enough t-shirt fans to fill up the place. TCU only has about 70,000 living alums. On the other hand, Bama’s numerous t-shirt fans will take out a second mortgage to get in the stadium for a playoff game.
LikeLike
Well Alabama has had trouble getting students to their games. They’re getting a little spoiled. TCU won’t expect to get there that often. They matched Wisconsin in Pasadena in the Rose Bowl.
LikeLike
Perhaps Brian was referring to TCU being able to sleep in their own beds and practice in their own facilities right up until the game, if they choose to?
LikeLike
Exactly. I realize TCU fans probably won’t buy more tickets, but the game would essentially be at home for them. That has to be an advantage.
Let me put it this way – what if it was #3 UT vs #2 AL in Jerryworld? Would people consider that a problem?
LikeLike
Ohio State used to be a non-entity in Chicago area T-shirt fans, but I think its recent rise in this metric has come largely at the expense of Notre Dame.
LikeLike
Traditionally OSU has had very few alumni (relatively speaking) in Chicago, and that probably carries over to non-alumni fans.
LikeLike
US News & World Report rankings are out.
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
By P5 conference.
Pac-12: #5 Stanford, #20 Cal, #23 UCLA, #23 USC, #52 Washington, #89 Colorado, #103 Oregon, #115 Utah, #121 Arizona, #129 Arizona State, #135 Oregon State & #140 Washington State.
ACC: #8 Duke, #26 Virginia, #27 Wake Forest, #30 BC, #30 North Carolina, #36 GA Tech, #51 Miami, #61 Clemson, #61 Syracuse, #66 Pitt, #70 VA Tech, #89 NC State, #96 Florida State & #168 Louisville.
B1G: #12 Northwestern, #29 Michigan, #41 Illinois, #41 Wisconsin, #47 Penn State, #52 Ohio State, #57 Maryland, #61 Purdue, #69 Minnesota, #72 Rutgers, #75 Indiana, #75 Michigan State, #82 Iowa & #103 Nebraska.
SEC: #15 Vandy, #47 Florida, #61 Georgia, #70 Texas A&M, #96 Alabama, #102 Auburn, #103 Mizzou, #103 Tennessee, #108 South Carolina, #129 LSU, #129 Arkansas, #129 Kentucky, #140 Ole Miss & #161 Miss State.
Big XII: #52 Texas, #72 Baylor, #82 TCU, #108 Iowa State, #108 Oklahoma!, #115 Kansas, #146 K-State, #149 OK State, #168 Texas Tech & #175 West Virginia.
Possible realignment targets: #41 Tulane, #57 UConn, #61 SMU, #66 BYU, #140 Cincy, #156 USF, #168 UCF, #180 New Mexico, #187 Houston, #187 Nevada, #194 East Carolina, NR Memphis & NR UNLV.
Of interest to some on this board: #4 Chicago, #10 Johns Hopkins, #18 Rice & #18 Notre Dame.
I know many poster here deride the USN&WR rankings, but schools and parents do care.
LikeLike
That the highest-rated public instititution is only No. 20 is a disgraceful indictment of the lack of importance state governments place on higher education.
LikeLike
The ratings are based heavily upon freshman SAT/ACT scores, the percentage of undergraduate applicants accepted and the amount of research (dollars, papers, grad students) per faculty. Private schools focus on only these things and select for elite students and elite researchers. Public schools are supposed to be serving a broader public with a larger focus on teaching and public service (e.g., ag extension). Their generally lower ranking merely reflects their assigned tasks, which are openly denigrated by the ranking bodies. It doesn’t imply a lack of support or neglect by state governments. State governments also have other things to worry about like crime, roads, Medicare, etc., and public universities do not warrant the top priority among state concerns. Harvard’s Board of Trustees could not care less about Cambridge’s homeless, if there are any in that elite town. They care only about Harvard’s reputation. That is their only job.
LikeLike
Few takeaways:
*Is it just me or has Iowa (#82) been slipping in the rankings? Pre-Nebraska, I always thought MSU and Indiana brought up the rear of the B1G.
*I’ve pushed for a Virginia and Virginia Tech addition to the B1G. Would VT (#70) be accepted given that its not AAU?
*Four power 5 leagues have at least one academic elite, the Big 12 does not have any (UT Austin is still pretty good though).
*I realize there are other metrics but I’m not so sure how likely an Oklahoma (#108) or KU (#115) addition to the B1G would be. Both would really drag down the conference.
*Rice (#18) deserves a lot better than CUSA. Perhaps it could give the Big 12 its academic elite?
LikeLike
*I’ve pushed for a Virginia and Virginia Tech addition to the B1G. Would VT (#70) be accepted given that its not AAU?
I doubt that the B1G would want two schools in the same state, even if both were in the AAU. If they’re going to take only one school, they’re going to want the better one, and that’s UVA.
(That’s before you consider the fact that the USNews ranking is not what they rely on, even though it’s probably the most visible rating to laymen.)
LikeLike
ARWU came out recently:
AAC 79-102 (201-300 world)-Cincinnati, Houston, South Florida; 103-125 (301-400 world) Temple, Tulane, Central Florida, UConn
MWC 66-78 (151-200 world)-Hawaii; 79-102 (201-300 world) Colorado St., New Mexico; 103-125 (301-400 world) San Diego St., Wyoming; 126-146 (401-500 world) Utah St.
MAC 79-102 (201-300 world) SUNY-Buffalo
CUSA 45 (84 world) Rice; 79-102 (201-300 world) UAB; 126-146 (401-500 world) FIU
Independent 52-65 (101-150 world) UMass; 79-102 (201-300 world) Notre Dame; 103-125 (301-400 world) BYU
ACC Duke 23 (31); UNC 29 (39); Pitt 41 (70); 52-65 (101-150) Georgia Tech, Virginia; 66-78 (151-200) NC St., Miami; 79-102 (201-300) Florida St., Virginia Tech; 126-146 (401-500) Boston College, Clemson, Syracuse, Wake Forest; not ranked-Louisville
Big 10 Michigan 17 (22); Wisconsin 18 (24); Northwestern 19 (27); Illinois 21 (29); Minnesota 22 (30); Maryland 30 (43); Penn St. 36 (60); Purdue 37 (61); Rutgers 39 (64); Ohio St. 40 (67); Michigan St. 50 (99); Indiana 52-65 (101-150); Iowa 66-78 (151-200); Nebraska 79-102 (201-300)
Big 12 Texas 27 (37); Iowa St. 66-78 (151-200); Kansas 79-102 (201-300); Kansas St., Oklahoma St., Texas Tech, Oklahoma 126-146 (401-500); not ranked-West Virginia, TCU, Baylor
Pac 12 Stanford 2 (2); Cal 4 (4); UCLA 10 (12); Washington 13 (15); Colorado 26 (34); USC 32 (49); Arizona 46 (90), Arizona St. 47 (93); Utah 47 (93); Oregon St. 66-78 (151-200), Oregon 103-125 (301-400), Washington St. 103-125 (301-400)
SEC Vanderbilt 34 (53); Florida 44 (83); Texas A&M 51 (100); Georgia, Tennessee 66-78 (151-200); LSU, Kentucky, South Carolina 79-102 (201-300); Missouri 103-125 (301-400); Auburn, Arkansas 126-146 (401-500); not ranked Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi St.
LikeLike
Wilner on P12N
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/09/09/pac-12-networks-update-on-negotiations-with-directv-and-att/
Whatever they do, always keep 51% ownership.
I think this could be a big mistake. BTN and SECN partner with large sports broadcast entities. P12N…potentially with Ma Bell’s bastard child?
LikeLike
And AT&T wouldn’t be buying that equity stake, they’d take it in exchange for DTV carriage.
LikeLike
How exactly will ATT negotiate with itself when time to renew u-verse comes around?
LikeLike
Then again, this is Wilner, the guy who hasn’t been terribly on his stories of OU/OksU to the Pac a few years ago. I guess wait and see is the best idea.
LikeLike
Back to thoughts about semi pro vs an Ivy model, sounds like Notre Dame won’t be in the former.
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/09/10/notre-dame-president-remains-against-paying-college-athletes
LikeLike
https://www.osu.edu/alumni/news/ohio-state-alumni-magazine/issues/september-october-2015/16-questions-for-gene-smith.html
Gene Smith thinks multiple schools would follow suit for one reason or another.
What about providing athletes payment for their images or likenesses?
I’m not in favor of that. It changes the collegiate model significantly. If the O’Bannon case, which was approved by a judge in California, is not overturned on appeal, then we’ll be into a mode where we have to pay for student-athletes likenesses. Now it wouldn’t happen right away. There would be a long length of time before we got clarity on what the judge meant specifically in her ruling. But if we get to that, you can pay up to $5,000 per athlete for their likeness. That changes the collegiate model significantly. We’d have a lot of schools that would drop sports.
LikeLike
It wouldn’t only be Notre Dame and Northwestern. Many public institutions like my alma mater Purdue would likely go down the Ivy route. The quality of athleticism would go down sharply (I know, less so at Purdue.), but fan enthusiasm likely would stay high. Go to an Ivy game this fall. I had a nephew that played at Cornell. His parents drove over 200 miles to every home game and went to every game in New England.
College athletics would be much healthier. People like Cardale Jones who don’t want an education would not be on campus, and there would be less distance between the actual students and the student/athletes.
It might solve the NFL’s problems with college draftees, too. According to today’s WSJ, the college game has diverged so much from the pro game that most incoming college quarterbacks have not heard of things like cover 2 and can do only the most rudimentary reading of defenses. College defenses also have been simplified to counter the no-huddle high tempo (and very simplified) offenses. The NFL would have to build its own minor league like baseball, soccer, hockey and the NBA. So be it.
LikeLike
“The quality of athleticism would go down sharply…”
This is my only disagreement. I’m not sure it goes down sharply, unless only 10-20 teams/schools choose the academics first model. Is there going to be a space on the pay for play rosters to add all of the better athletes? And would all of them choose to go?
LikeLike
Most of the B1G teams could survive, even thrive, as an “Ivy”. I just wonder if the NFL would institute a “from-the-ground-up” AAA-AA-A setup corresponding to market size like MLB, or would they perhaps “rent” facilities from former G5 and high FCS since some (but perhaps not all) of the lower level programs perhaps might not retain such interest. Some may seek and take a “bailout” from the NFL to pay down the cost of recently built or improved facilities. Ann Arbor might not be an ideal affiliate for the Lions, but I’m sure places like Toledo (UT) and Kalamazoo (WMU) might consider it.
LikeLike
Why would the NFL take on the cost of a minor league system as long as FB is still being played collegiately? No more than two teams worth of players make it to the NFL. There are 10,000+ players playing D1, and not costing the NFL anything.
LikeLike
That’s exactly right. There is no need to take on an expensive minor league system, when the NCAA gives it to you for free.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“College athletics would be much healthier. People like Cardale Jones who don’t want an education would not be on campus, and there would be less distance between the actual students and the student/athletes.”
It’d be more appropriate to say the Jones didn’t want an education. He’s matured since then and seems to truly value the opportunity now. It doesn’t change your point, I just wanted to note that he’s no longer the poster boy for that.
“It might solve the NFL’s problems with college draftees, too. According to today’s WSJ, the college game has diverged so much from the pro game that most incoming college quarterbacks have not heard of things like cover 2 and can do only the most rudimentary reading of defenses. College defenses also have been simplified to counter the no-huddle high tempo (and very simplified) offenses. The NFL would have to build its own minor league like baseball, soccer, hockey and the NBA. So be it.”
1. Many of the football factories would go along with the changes, and some of those schools are the drivers of these modified offenses (OSU, OR, etc). The NFL is still going to face that issue.
2. As long as some colleges go along, the NFL won’t start a developmental league. The top players will be at a smaller number of schools making it even easier to use college as the minor league.
3. Only if all schools dropped down would the NFL start a new league, and even then it would be tough to prosper. They’d have to rent college stadiums most likely.
LikeLike
3: Why?
Was Jerry Rice hindered by playing at a lower school? Rothlisburger? Favre? Etc.
The talent will still be displayed and coached as now, just with a different set of scholarship regulations. Unless the NFL feels the players are actually being seriously diminished/damaged by college participation they will still have the same talent pool. They just might have to do a bit more fundamental coaching to reform them in the image the NFL (minus Philly) currently favors.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“3: Why?
Was Jerry Rice hindered by playing at a lower school? Rothlisburger? Favre? Etc.”
Actually yes, they all were hindered but overcame it. But if all the schools drop to taking sports less seriously, the time spent on the game and the skills taught wouldn’t be sufficient preparation for the NFL. Colleges are hitting less and less in practice and playing quite differently than the NFL already. If the talk of reducing the time commitment is followed up, players may spend half the time they do now on football (or even less). In addition, it would also probably mean a greater emphasis on education so a lot of players that get admitted now wouldn’t get admitted anymore. If the NFL wants to maintain it’s current level, it will have to take over the developmental duties that college is dropping.
“Unless the NFL feels the players are actually being seriously diminished/damaged by college participation they will still have the same talent pool.”
See above.
“They just might have to do a bit more fundamental coaching to reform them in the image the NFL (minus Philly) currently favors.”
The current NFL rules don’t allow time for that teaching to happen. The NFLPA keeps reducing the time the players are available. Something will have to give.
LikeLike
It will be a big game of chicken. In the end, hardly anyone drops voluntarily. Yale used to fill their 70,000 seat stadium. Princeton replaced their 45,000 seat stadium with a 20,000 seat stadium.
Attendance goes down, donations go down, luxury box prices go down, seat prices go down and TV revenue drops. They just aren’t going to do it. Now eventually, the G5 schools will be forced financially to drop down or drop football entirely.
LikeLike
Another benefit of limited substitution being re-implemented.
1) You force smaller sizes reducing injury;
2) You force smaller sizes leaving players healthier when they leave the sport;
3) You separate yourself from the pros, perhaps driving the creation of a minor league for the few. The pros will want the specialists and the giant 300+ lb linemen. That also reduces the value and pressure to pay those who remain, which will still be the vast majority of players. But the value won’t be so distorted by the 1% who will go pro.
LikeLike
“Attendance goes down, donations go down, luxury box prices go down, seat prices go down and TV revenue drops.”
When the Ivys de-emphasized they were an outlier, and their “product” diminished in comparison to the rest of D1. If the majority of D1 went a non pro model it wouldn’t be to de-emphasize. It would be to emphasize the educational nature of all the schools departments. They wouldn’t be an outlier, and I see no reason for much change in interest either from fans or the media.
PS: in overall value of the school I don’t think the Ives have been hurt by average T shirt fans perception of one department.
LikeLike
“People like Cardale Jones who don’t want an education would not be on campus, and there would be less distance between the actual students and the student/athletes.”
-Jones is an honor roll student and turned a multi-million dollar paycheck to stay in school & finish his degree. Earlier this year he tweeted that he still can’t believe he said something so stupid.
But please…continue.
LikeLike
“The Ivy League has some really dedicated fans!”
Sure, just a couple hundred of them, compared to a couple hundred thousand, but it’s not zero!
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/13631750/pac-12-proposes-allowing-athletes-make-money-names
The P12 proposes that players be allowed to make money off their name and likeness for non-athletic business ventures.
Other proposals for NCAA rule changes:
• The SEC and ACC each have proposals that would prevent football coaches from holding so-called satellite camps away from their campuses.
• The Mountain West has proposed allowing NCAA-sponsored events to be played in states that allow sports wagering.
• The Mid-American Conference has proposed lifting all restrictions on communicating with recruits over social media.
• A proposal that creates new academic misconduct rules with also be considered. The proposal would require schools to publish and follow an academic misconduct policy for all students; define impermissible academic assistance; and determine when a student worker’s involvement would be considered academic misconduct.
• The Division I Council wants schools to consider a measure that would give men’s basketball players 10 days from the end of the NBA combine to withdraw their names from the draft, allow college players to enter the draft multiple times and allow them to participate in the combine and try out for one NBA team per year.
LikeLike
Allowing college players to make money off their name and likeness for non-athletic ventures will be perfect for boosters to payoff players above board and legally. No more need to slip the star running back a couple of hundred collars. The big booster car dealer in Birmingham can just hire the RB to star in a car commercial for a quick $5,000, per month. Sure would be easier for Auburn to pay Cam Newton, without those pesky rules. Just hire him as your spokesman,
This would solve some Title IX problems. In no female athlete can get a sponsorship, too bad.
Of course, I am not sure how happy the top flight left tackle will feel, if he cannot market his own likeness, but he is keeping the $50,000 (or much more) QB standing on his feet.
Naturally, the SEC and ACC want to stop off campus camps. They want to protect their turf from the B1G, or whomever. Will the Big 12 or PAC 12 support that?
LikeLike
Depends on how they write it.
I think the intent was to allow them to do businesses on the side. I think there was some non-rev athlete who had to choose. Imagine if Michael Dell was a golfer and had to choose between golf and making computers.
Of course, as you mention, there’s a lot of potential for abuse.
LikeLike
There was Jeremy Bloom, the punt returner and Olympic gold medalist and World Champion skier who wasn’t allowed to get endorsements for skiing and still play NCAA football, so he quit 2 years early. He played in the NFL for several years, though.
The NCAA rules have changed since then, so you only become ineligible in the sport you get paid in (former minor leaguers can play football for example).
LikeLike
Bloom wasn’t trying to be paid for his skiing. That was allowed (Danny Ainge: BYU basketball and Bluejay baseball concurrently). He was looking to market his persona and fame (commercials, endorsements, etc) in areas not directly a sports activity, and not for the a sport activity.
LikeLike
His endorsements were based on his skiing, not football. Endorsements are how skiers get paid. Prize money is miniscule. And he was declared ineligible for taking the money. It sounds like the P12 wants to change that.
LikeLike
In other words he was wanting paid indirectly, not for participation or results. Picture the Boz taking up golf and getting enforcements for demonstrating how much abuse a particular brand of clubs can take, with the unspoken agreement that he must be with school “X”.
I’d like to see the particulars of the Pac’s proposal, because it surprises me that they would support such an idea. Devil may be in the details.
LikeLike
I agree, the details of the proposal are very important. The ESPN.com writer may have mischaratcerized it in an attempt at brevity.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/123355/breaking-down-nfl-rosters-by-conferences-and-colleges
A breakdown of all the NFL rosters by conference and school.
Total players: SEC 297, ACC 231, Big Ten 217, Pac-12 215, Big 12 127, American 96, Mountain West 70, Conference USA 55, MAC 52, Sun Belt 30
Average per school: SEC 21.2, Pac-12 17.9, ACC 16.5, Big Ten 15.5, Big 12 12.7, American 7.9, Mountain West 5.8, Conference USA 4.2, MAC 4.0, Sun Belt 2.7
Big Ten: Ohio State 25, Penn State 24, Iowa 22, Wisconsin 22, Nebraska 21, Michigan 18, Rutgers 16, Michigan State 15, Maryland 14, Purdue 12, Illinois 9, Minnesota 8, Indiana 6, Northwestern 5
Top 20
36 — Miami
35 — LSU
33 — Alabama, Georgia
32 — Florida State, USC
30 — Florida
28 — Oklahoma, Oregon
26 — Cal, Notre Dame, Tennessee
25 — Auburn, Ohio State*
24 — Clemson, Penn State, Texas
23 — Stanford
22 — Iowa, Wisconsin
* This number should jump up as OSU looks to have a big draft class (10+) and potentially challenge the record of 14. They won’t all make teams, but there are as many as 9 projected to go in the top 2 rounds. Not that non-OSU fans really care, but I wanted to explain why this number seems low.
Rookies
By conference: SEC 50, ACC 45, Pac-12 37, Big Ten 32, Big 12 21
By school: Florida State 9, Auburn 8, Miami (Fla.) 8, Alabama 7, Clemson 7, Louisville 6, Stanford 6, Georgia 5, LSU 5, Oregon State 5, Washington 5
LikeLike
Note that Michigan and Nebraska are NOT on your list.
And that Oregon and Cal 11 or higher. If you were to have the average knowledgeable fan guess the top 17 (24 and up), they would probably do a pretty good job.
A survey would probably include Michigan, Nebraska and 15 of the actual top 17. Cal wouldn’t be in there and Clemson or Oregon would probably be #18.
LikeLike
bullet,
“Note that Michigan and Nebraska are NOT on your list.”
Correct. But NE would be #21 and MI #25, so they aren’t far off.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/91053/breaking-down-nfl-rosters-by-conferences-and-colleges
They changed the location. This link is valid.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13625028/pittsburgh-panthers-west-virginia-mountaineers-resume-backyard-brawl-2022
How happy are Pitt fans right now?
1. A new head coach providing the hope for a better future.
2. The PSU rivalry is back for 2016-2019.
3. The Backyard Brawl is back for 2022-2025.
They also have series with UC, TN and ND coming up.
LikeLike
Maybe they’ll get back to the top 10 in NFL players produced, as they had been in the 1980s to mid 90s. The Hugh Greens stay home now and their running on legacy local products (Revis, Donald).
LikeLike
Caught a bit of the Western Kentucky – LA Tech game last night, and I’m watching the Miami – FAU game now. Both on FS1. Anyone notice how they are calling the games from the studio in Los Angeles? These are lower tier games (although Miami is no slouch) but it seems really cheap/low budget to me.
LikeLike
Honestly it should be a red flag to anyone in the Big Ten all in Fox camp. This isn’t a web stream of water polo in the Bejing Olympics with a 12 hour time difference. The fact Fox didn’t send a crew to either of the Thursday or Friday games is an embarrassment.
LikeLike
ESPN has been doing this for basketball and football the last 1-2 years. Where have you been?
LikeLike
They’ve never done it for college football and college football and college basketball are far from the same thing.
LikeLike
And ESPN was pretty universally panned when they did it last year on college basketball (they’ll keep doing it). It makes sense on certain games like ESPN3 only games where there is going to be a limited web only audience. It does not make sense on FS1 with Miami when you are trying to position yourself as a serious competitor to ESPN.
LikeLike
If you are going to do that, why not just use the local announcers. NCAA tourney had different channels with the homer announcers.
LikeLike
Looking at the Saturday TV schedule here in Atlanta. 37! games on today. When you throw in the TH/F games and the networks not listed (BTN,P12N,LHN) it totals 48 games on the air.
Almost all the P5 games are on the air. I didn’t look to see who was off this week, but even if everyone played, its a pretty high %.
Big 10 12/14 (3 BTN)
Big 12 7/10 (1 LHN)
SEC 13/14 (5 SECN)
ACC 7/14
Pac 12 10/12 (4 P12N)
(does highlight the ACC’s need for a network)
MWC 11/12
CUSA 10/13
AAC 6/11
MAC 5/12
SB 2/11
Ind 3/4
FCS 10 (only 1 involves only FCS schools-local Kennesaw St.)
LikeLike
Almost all the P5 games are on the air.
I think it’s the rare P5 game that cannot somehow be watched on TV, provided, you buy enough channels.
LikeLike
Ohio St freshman wrestler became the U.S.’s youngest world champion last night at 198lbs. Great set of wins, especially in the finals over the heavily favored Russian.
LikeLike
Might be appropriate to mention his name…
Kyle Snyder=world champion!
LikeLike
For OSU fans, it’s a shame he’s taking an Olympic redshirt year so we won’t see him in scarlet and gray again until 2016-2017.
LikeLike
The PAC CEO’s say no thanks to ATT/DTV.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/
LikeLike
The natives are getting restless in College Park. With 14 minutes to go, Maryland trails Bowling Green 27-20 (even though that includes another Will Likely punt return TD) — and it comes on a day when three of Randy Edsall’s Terrapin coaching cohorts — among them Mark Turgeon and Brenda Frese — were honored on the field for winning B1G coach of the year honors in 2014-2015.
LikeLike
41-27 Falcons, 8:18 to go. Men’s and women’s basketball season can’t come quickly enough.
LikeLike
Team Stats RICE TEX
First Downs 30 11
Total Plays 96 38
Total Yards 462 277
Passing 257 131
Rushing 228 149
Penalties 6 / 55 4 / 42
Possession 44:02 15:58
Loki: how does Rice not win this game?
LikeLike
Texas got up 21-0 in the 1st quarter and then let Rice run up and down the field after that.
Defense and special teams didn’t let UT offense on the field.
Stats you aren’t showing-Rice 5 TOs, UT 1. Punt return yardage-Rice 0, UT 175 (1 TD, 1 to 6 yd line). Interception return yardage-Rice 0, UT 3 for 62. Fumble returns for TD-Rice 0, UT 1 (26 yards).
LikeLike
When you throw in kickoff returns, Texas had more return yardage than regular offense. Year to date, they have more return yardage than regular offense!
LikeLike
Ouch.
LikeLike
The Texas offense is pretty hard to watch. At least they have finally put the freshman Heard in as QB. Texas is ahead of only Akron in total offense per game.
The defense will be fine. It started off pretty putrid last year as well. The offense needs some help. Texas will win several games on raw athletic talent.
LikeLike
Rice beat Rice.
Any of Texas’ remaining opponents are going to look at that film and lick their chops. Texas may only win two more games with that run defense. Once they’re playing P5 teams who aren’t a full second slower in the 100 these big plays don’t happen.
Rice will still reach 8-4 this year. Excepting Baylor every remaining game is winnable.
LikeLike
Moses Malone passes. One of the most underrated of the all-time greats. He was one of the first 3 players to come straight out of HS to the pros. He won a championship with Dr. J and the 76ers in ’83, but what he did in 1981 with the Rockets was more impressive. He took a team with a losing record to the NBA finals, pushing the Celtics to 6 games. And it was with a starting lineup of Malone, Billy Paultz, Robert Reid, Tom Henderson and Mike Dunleavy. It was a team stronger on coaching ability than talent. Bench included Rudy Thomjanovich in his final year, Calvin Murphy near the end of his career, Calvin Garret, Allen Leavell, John Stroud, Lee Johnson and Bill Willoughy (one of the other 3 to come out of HS-and the one who should have gone to college-enormous athletic ability-but never did much in the pros).
RIP Moses.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/13/us/moses-malone-dead/index.html
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13647582/nba-moses-malone-was-nba-most-underappreciated-great-player
ESPN article agrees.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/page/gamedayfinal091215/week-2-performances-arkansas-razorbacks-auburn-tigers-expose-flaws-sec-claim-conference-superiority
Mark Schlabach (notorious SEC shill on ESPN.com) points out that yesterday’s performance pokes a hole in the standard SEC logic of how much harder an SEC schedule is. Clearly the SEC has several excellent teams again, but the East looked bad and so did a couple of West teams. It’s only 1 day, so we shouldn’t read too much into it but it’s an interesting result after getting 10 teams in the AP poll.
You have to think AU will drop a little. UGA and MO might slip a bit. AR better drop out of the poll, and both TN and MS St probably will. We’ll find out in an hour.
LikeLike
Auburn should have dropped out. They have 2 weak results in 2 weeks of play (Louisville lost to Houston yesterday). Obviously they aren’t eliminated from playoff contention, but at this point they shouldn’t be ranked. The same is true (although to a lesser extent) with Missouri and Baylor. Plenty of time for them to get back, but they don’t look like top 25 teams at the moment.
UT dropping out of the top 25 in the coaches poll was a dumb thing that polls do all the time. If they truly believe OU is the 17th ranked team in the country, then UT deserves to be ranked a bit behind them for playing them to a draw in regulation. It’s also non-sensical for LSU to be ranked 14 while MSU isn’t ranked at all Move LSU back or MSU up.
If I’m going to continue to rant about the coaches poll (which you could do every week): Notre Dame should be lower, as dominating the Longhorns just isn’t impressive as they would like to think, while Georgia Tech should be a top 10 team. Of course, next week will sort that out one way or another.
LikeLike
You also have to allow for it being early. Any early loss tends to hurt a lot because there are currently over 50 undefeated teams. How do we know they aren’t better than teams with a “good” loss? Maybe that loss isn’t as good as we think.
LikeLike
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches Poll is out.
Top 10, big movers and B10 teams:
1. OSU
2. AL
3. TCU
4. MSU
5. Baylor
6. FSU
7. USC
8. UGA
9. Clemson
10. ND
13. OR
15. AU
21. Utah
22. BYU
23. WI
24. NW
SEC – 7
P12 – 5
B10, B12 – 4
ACC – 3
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
And the AP Poll.
Top 10, big movers and B10 teams:
1. OSU
2. AL
3. TCU
4. MSU
5. Baylor
6. USC
7. UGA
8. ND
9. FSU
10. UCLA
12. OR
18. AU
19. BYU
23. NW
24. WI
SEC – 7
P12 – 5
B10, B12 – 4
ACC – 3
LikeLike
Just like last year, OSU and ‘Bama are the 2 best teams.
I still don’t get why a bunch of prognosticators picked Auburn instead of ‘Bama for the playoffs in the preseason.
LikeLike
I agree it seemed and still seems unwise, but the theory was:
1. Will Muschamp will magically fix the defense.
2. New starting QB Jeremy Johnson would be a Heisman candidate in Malzahn’s offense.
3. The AL game is at home.
LikeLike
As m(Ag) said, Auburn should not be ranked.
Missouri remains questionable at #22 although they did drop a spot.
I would have kept Tennessee ranked, no shame in losing in double OT to then #19 OU.
You could argue that Miss State should still be ranked after missing a walk off field goal to win against then #14 LSU, but I felt they shouldn’t be ranked last week so I don’t have a problem with them falling out.
I’d say the SEC has a legitimate claim to 6 ranked teams. Alabama looks like the class of the league, from what I have seen so far only Ole Miss and Texas A&M can touch them. Maybe LSU with pure athleticism but their offensive style plays right into Alabama’s defensive style.
Good to see Wisconsin and NW in the polls (they should have been ranked last week).
I would have moved MSU up to #3. Still don’t think they are as good as OSU or Alabama, but I would take them over TCU. At the same time, I would have kept Oregon at #7 after almost pulling off the comeback against then #5 MSU.
Oklahoma State is a curious addition at #25, probably would have gone with Temple instead.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/13662471/texas-longhorns-fire-athletic-director-steve-patterson
UT fired they’re AD after only 22 months. He’ll probably get quite a buyout since he had a guaranteed deal through 2019.
Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby, former Texas coach and ESPN analyst Mack Brown, Louisville AD Tom Jurich and NCAA executive vice president Oliver Luck are among the leading candidates to replace Patterson, sources told ESPN’s Brett McMurphy.
Sources told the American-Statesman that Brown has met with Fenves but is not being considered for the permanent job. Jurich and Luck were both candidates to replace Dodds in 2013.
What do you think of the decision and who do you think will replace him, bullet?
LikeLike
Ugh.
* their AD
LikeLike
I believe they offered 1yr pay, or face being fired for cause and risk getting nothing.
LikeLike
He was mistreating the alumni.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“I believe they offered 1yr pay, or face being fired for cause and risk getting nothing.”
http://www.hookem.com/story/breaking-steve-patterson-expected-out-as-texas-athletic-director/
Patterson had a guaranteed contract that runs through August 2019. When Patterson was hired in November 2013, the UT System Board of Regents approved a five-year, guaranteed contract worth $1.4 million annually. His deal included an annual 2.5-percent cost of living pay increase. The contract has no buyout clause, which means UT is on the hook for the remaining balance.
UT’s fiscal year began Sept. 1. Patterson would be owed at least $5.6 million on his contract, although it’s possible Patterson and school officials could negotiate a lower amount.
…
Editor’s note: The original version of this story has been edited to reflect that Patterson has been fired by the University of Texas.
They may have reached a settlement as you described, but I don’t know why he’d agree to that. He was fired, he didn’t resign.
LikeLike
Brian:
http://www.scout.com/college/texas/story/1586647-sources-fenves-weighing-patterson-s-future
Last line, first paragraph.
Although, it is from the Chipster. Place what faith you care to in it.
LikeLike
After Texas president Gregory Fenves discussed his decision to fire athletic director Steve Patterson with regents Monday night, Fenves met with Patterson Tuesday morning and told him he could accept reassignment within the athletic department, or accept a 1-year buyout of roughly $1.4 million, or possibly face being fired for cause, two sources told HornsDigest.com.
All I’m saying is that it’s being reported he was fired, making it sound like he chose option 3 not option 2.
LikeLike
I wonder if his contract has a “you can be fired for being an ass” clause.
LikeLike
Oh, I agree, probably. It might still be reported as a firing if he took the $ offer.
LikeLike
Yeah, I expect most people would look on a contract buy-out as being sacked while having the good fortune of working on a contract that makes it worthwhile to pay the buy out. I reckon Vols fans looked on the multiple head coaches that the Vols were at one time paying not to coach the Vols as men who had been sacked for incompetence as a head coach.
LikeLike
No clue who will replace him. It won’t be Bowlsby or Brown. I doubt Luck will switch.
Patterson had ticked off about everyone. Made some comment about needing funding for a new tennis facility (old one removed for football stadium expansion) and the tennis coach quit. The university had already agreed to fund the new facility. Apparently ticked off a lot of people negotiating on city funding for the new basketball arena as well, saying they might just renovate. President had to come out and say they arena couldn’t stay because the new medical school was going there. He charged an alumni group $25 a head if they wanted to go on the field. He told grandfathered season ticket holders (no donation) they would lose their tickets if they re-sold them. It has been well documented how he ticked off Jamail and other big boosters with his secrecy on the Charlie Strong hire. And of course he raised ticket prices notably after a bad season. The list could continue.
Basically, he didn’t communicate well and had no ability to schmooze. If you are an AD and can’t do that, you need someone who can, preferably the head coach. But Charlie Strong hates that and doesn’t do it very well. He had to hire a bunch of people to try to do it for him, but having assistants try to do that just doesn’t work.
It was inevitable. I was just surprised it happened so quickly.
The President sent out this e-mail.
DEAR LONGHORNS,
I write to let you know that Texas Men’s Athletics Director Steve Patterson has resigned. An agreement is pending approval by The University of Texas System Board of Regents.
Steve brought important ideas and changes to our athletics program, and I appreciate the good things he accomplished in his time at UT. I wish him the best in his future endeavors.
I have asked Mike Perrin, a Houston attorney and former Longhorn letterman football player, to serve as interim athletic director at least through August. Mike is a devoted Longhorn and respected Texan who I firmly believe will strengthen relationships with and among our student-athletes, coaches, faculty, staff, students and alumni.
I want you to know that I have full confidence in Coach Charlie Strong, Coach Shaka Smart, and all our other coaches. They work hard to win with integrity and give our student-athletes the full support they deserve.
Athletics is vitally important to the Longhorn nation, shining a bright light on the university. I look forward to continued success in our programs and seeing you all at games this year, supporting our teams and our student-athletes.
Sincerely,
LikeLike
It’s risky to name a lawyer with no sports administration experience as interim AD of a department that large. I’m sure he’ll lean on his staff while he focuses on the schmoozing side for now, but it’s still a risk. I know he rubbed people the wrong way, but many of his ideas don’t sound that crazy to outsiders. How he presented them and how they clashed with UT culture is another kettle of fish, though. At least you know the AD can afford to pay his settlement.
LikeLike
With Louisville settled firmly into the ACC, might Jurich be interested in Austin now?
LikeLike
“It’s risky to name a lawyer with no sports administration experience as interim AD of a department that large.”
U of Nike hired an insurance salesman without a college degree…
LikeLike
Phil Knight runs their AD.
Besides, risky doesn’t mean it can’t work.
LikeLike
I like the idea of Tom Jurich being named AD. His experience moving Louisville to the ACC should come in handy when it’s time to do the same for Texas
LikeLike
Are you assuming Texas is going to the ACC in some Notre Dame-like capacity? Logistically, it would leave UT’s non-football programs in a travel situation similar to WVU in the Big 12. And I’m not sure Jurich would still be in Austin by the middle of next decade, when the next round of realignment is likely to take place.
LikeLike
This could be a big weekend for the B10 with 5 games featuring the B10 West versus the ACC Coastal (the two worst P5 divisions in CFB, supposedly). The ACC is favored in 4 of them and hosts 3 of them. Winning at least 3 would help the B10’s reputation.
IL +9 @ UNC
NW +3.5 @ Duke
PU +5.5 vs VT
NE +5 @ Miami
IA -3 vs Pitt
LikeLike
Georgia Tech v Wisconsin and UVA v Minnesota are missing
LikeLike
Nice little B10(W)-ACC(C) challenge here.
Would be neat if the 2 did something like that every year.
LikeLike
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/09/researchers-find-evidence-of-cte-in-96-of-deceased-nfl-players-they-tested
Playing football is bad for you.
Researchers published findings this week that 87 of 91 deceased NFL players tested were found to have evidence of the brain disease chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE.
The study was conducted by the Department of Veterans Affairs and Boston University and found that 96% of former NFL players tested had evidence of the degenerative brain disease, with 79% of all football players tested — who played at all levels — showing signs of the disease.
The researchers tested the brains of 165 former football players who competed at the high school, college, semi-pro or professional level. Of those tested, 131 showed signs of CTE.
…
It must be said that there is a major caveat in the research, because those people and families who agreed to be tested are more likely those who suspected they might have that disease.
Those are ugly numbers, but as they mention selection bias may be a huge factor in the results. How many families who didn’t sense anything wrong with their loved one would agree to have their brain examined?
But then there was this quote from Frontline:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sports/concussion-watch/new-87-deceased-nfl-players-test-positive-for-brain-disease/
Forty percent of those who tested positive were the offensive and defensive linemen who come into contact with one another on every play of a game, according to numbers shared by the brain bank with FRONTLINE. That finding supports past research suggesting that it’s the repeat, more minor head trauma that occurs regularly in football that may pose the greatest risk to players, as opposed to just the sometimes violent collisions that cause concussions.
I hate to break it to them, but OL and DL make up roughly 40% of the starters on a football team (5 OL + 4 DL = 41%). If playing on the line was worse for CTE, they should represent a significantly larger fraction of those testing positive than the 40% of starters that they are.
LikeLike
I have long believed that football should eliminate the helmets and pads. That would result in a more rugby like style of play, since blocking and tackling techniques would have to change. A bit rougher than flag football. Since football would since have passing, it would become a more open, fluid and even higher scoring game. Rugby looks like fun to the players (all of whom are very beefy and large), but the actual spectacle is subpar for watchers, escpecially the scrums and aborted runs. Sideins have some merit.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“I have long believed that football should eliminate the helmets and pads.”
Because paramedics and ER doctors don’t get enough work? Helmets were introduced to prevent deaths from head injury that threatened to end football. Facemasks prevented broken bones and missing teeth. Pads distribute force and reduce soft tissue injury.
“That would result in a more rugby like style of play, since blocking and tackling techniques would have to change.”
Some teams are moving to rugby-style tackling already because players do it more successfully. The reduction in injury potential is a bonus.
“A bit rougher than flag football.”
The numbers vary from study to study, but some data shows rugby to be more dangerous than football for head and spine injuries.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/premiership/11407436/Rugby-concussions-soar-by-59-per-cent-says-report.html
On average, there are 10.5 concussions per 1,000 playing hours. By way of comparison there are 17 concussions per 1,000 hours in boxing and 25 per 1,000 hours in jump horse racing. The difference, of course, is that rugby players are not placed in a position to fall nine feet from an object moving at 40mph nor are they asked to purposefully knock each other unconscious.
…
The NFL, which has a lower rate of concussion than in rugby …
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/shortcuts/2013/jan/28/american-football-rugby-more-dangerous
In rugby it is spinal injuries from scrums that are the most dangerous (110 rugby players in Britain have been paralysed by playing the game).
LikeLike
I wonder whether rugby league is better or worse than rugby union for concussions … it ought to be better for spinal injuries, since union places a much higher emphasis on the scrum.
LikeLike
Some thoughts on the issue:
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/05/26/ncaa-athletic-finances-revenue-expense-division-i/27971457/
The NCAA’s annual report on AD finances is out for 2013-2014. 24 schools qualified as self-sufficient this year, all P5 schools.
By NCAA definition, self-sufficiency means an athletic department’s generated operating revenues — not counting money from student fees, university funding or direct government support — are at least equal to its total operating expenses, which is legalese for taking in more money than you spend.
Oregon led the nation with $196 million total operating revenue and an $83.5 million difference between its generated revenue and its total operating expense of $110.4 million. However, the school reported that its revenue included in-kind facility gifts of $95 million — the value of a football training facility funded primarily by Nike co-founder Phil Knight and his wife.
The other 23 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
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
The database of numbers.
The top 20 all topped $100M in total revenue.
B10 (7) – 3. MI, 5. OSU, 8. WI, 12. PSU, 15. MN, 16. IA, 18. MSU
SEC (7) – 4. AL, 6. LSU, 9. UF, 10. TAMU, 13. AU, 14. TN, 19. UGA
B12 (3) – 2. UT, 7. OU, 11, OkSU
P12 (2) – 1. OR, 20. UW
ACC (1) – 17. FSU
Remember, private schools aren’t included (no ND or USC).
LikeLike
The first playoff’s semifinals were almost perfect in terms of the teams and the sites:
AL vs OSU in the Sugar
OR vs FSU in the Rose
4 of the top brands in the two biggest bowls.
What would the perfect playoff be from the bowl’s/ESPN’s POV?
For maximum national interest, I think you need ND (east coast and midwest) and USC (west coast) plus 2 other top brands. To me, the other top brands are probably AL, MI, OSU and UT. I think UT is a strong choice to get that giant TX audience. I’d guess AL is the other choice to get the southern fans. Besides, ND pulls enough midwestern interest to not want to double up there with OSU or MI.
Having AL, ND, USC and UT, now we need pairings. ND and USC play during the season, so we have to split them up for the ideal semifinals. That almost has to mean USC vs UT and AL vs ND.
The final choice is which pair of bowls host the games – Rose/Sugar, Cotton/Orange or Fiesta/Peach. Obviously the best pair is Rose/Sugar between their bigger brands and locked time slots on 1/1.
Result:
Rose – USC vs UT
Sugar – AL vs ND
How much will the other years suffer in comparison to 2014 based on the scheduling, lack of novelty and lesser brands? Will any year top 2014?
LikeLike
Emphasizing individual fan bases? This isn’t the NFL. I’d far prefer to see any B1G/PAC matchup in the Rose (or other semi location) to any of the other supposed more popular teams. Even WSU vs Indiana. Nationalizing college football interest around a limited number of teams will hurt the majority of teams, and the sport itself in the long run.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“Emphasizing individual fan bases? This isn’t the NFL.”
The CFP basically is. It’s a number game, and casual fans are they key to peak ratings. Traditional fans like you and me don’t factor into their thinking because we’re a small minority and they assume many of us will watch no matter what.
“Nationalizing college football interest around a limited number of teams will hurt the majority of teams, and the sport itself in the long run.”
Do you honestly think they spend a second thinking about it like that? ESPN is in it to make a profit now. Besides, many would argue that CFB already has nationalized interest around a few teams (the kings) already. The BCS started that process. Look at the limited number of regional broadcasts anymore.
LikeLike
Brian:
“Do you honestly think they spend a second thinking about it like that? ESPN is in it to make a profit now.”
No, but ESPN is the transmitter of the content. It’s not the creator.
“Besides, many would argue that CFB already has nationalized interest around a few teams (the kings) already.”
That’s the narrative constantly pushed by the national media. It’s so much easier for them than actually following and becoming knowledgable about different regions and teams. See: every “sports talk” show getting immersed in the cult of personality de jour. Farve, Winston, Manzell, etc to the neglect of almost everything else.
“The BCS started that process. Look at the limited number of regional broadcasts anymore.”
Agree, but it risks recreating MBB situation with only a season ending event drawing significant interest if you don’t maintain regional/local interest throughout the season.
Living on the left coast now I watched a fair amount of every PAC game yesterday, crappy match ups or not. I actually learned something about each team which may be informative when better competitive games (conference games) happen.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“No, but ESPN is the transmitter of the content. It’s not the creator.”
I was careful to ask about the ideal playoff from the bowls’/ESPN’s POV. You’re welcome to indicate your personal ideal version, too, which is what you started to do. I just want to be clear that I was asking from a specific POV.
My personal one(s) would be different, certainly:
Again, I’ll mostly leave out OSU to reduce my bias (not in the Rose, though). I’ll also aim for some variety.
1. Tradition
Rose – OSU vs USC
Sugar – AL vs OU
2. History
Orange – NE vs Miami
Cotton – UT vs ND
3. Newcomers
Fiesta – TCU vs OR
Peach – Clemson vs UF
“Agree, but it risks recreating MBB situation with only a season ending event drawing significant interest if you don’t maintain regional/local interest throughout the season.”
Agreed.
“Living on the left coast now I watched a fair amount of every PAC game yesterday, crappy match ups or not. I actually learned something about each team which may be informative when better competitive games (conference games) happen.”
UCLA vs BYU and USC vs Stanford were good.
LikeLike
I read somewhere once that the Big 4 in terms of TV draw (assuming that the teams were equally good) were ND, Texas, UMich, and USC, with tOSU 5th. It’s possible that with the hype of the ESS-EEE-SEE and ‘Bama’s titles in recent years that ‘Bama may be among that group as well, however.
LikeLike
Richard,
“I read somewhere once that the Big 4 in terms of TV draw (assuming that the teams were equally good) were ND, Texas, UMich, and USC, with tOSU 5th. It’s possible that with the hype of the ESS-EEE-SEE and ‘Bama’s titles in recent years that ‘Bama may be among that group as well, however.”
I would have guessed those were the top 4 in general with OSU and AL trending up. But as a group I suspected the overlap of ND and MI would make an outside team more valuable and that ND was worth more than MI. The south wasn’t in that group of 4, so I guessed that AL would be the best southern school for drawing ratings.
LikeLike
How much will the other years suffer in comparison to 2014 based on the scheduling, lack of novelty and lesser brands? Will any year top 2014?
The power in CFB is heavily concentrated with a handful of teams…so no, I don’t think 2014 is the last time that four national brand names will reach the playoff. And certainly, in most years there will be at least two or three.
As long as each semi-final has at least one team with a national following, it is less important to ESPN who the opponent is (although, of course, they want the best match-up possible). The only thing ESPN truly doesn’t want is a semi-final in which neither team has sex appeal: say, Kansas State vs. Minnesota.
If ESPN were choosing, Notre Dame and Texas would be in the playoff every year, but if they could get four teams as good as 2014, they’ll take it. I agree that, from their viewpoint, 2014 was very close to ideal.
MLB is no different. Television would prefer Yankees vs. Dodgers every year, but sometimes they get stuck with two small-market teams.
LikeLike
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches poll is out after another crazy weekend with lots of ranked teams struggling.
1. OSU
2. TCU
3. MSU
4. Baylor
5. MS
6. UGA
7. FSU
8. ND
9. LSU
10. Clemson
Movers and B10:
12. AL
18. USC
19. NW
20. GT
21. WI
24. Stanford
25. AU
SEC – 7 (50%)
P12 – 6 (50%)
B12 – 4 (40%)
B10 – 4 (29%)
ACC – 3 (21%)
LikeLike
Pollsters are stupid.
‘Bama still far above Ole Miss.
USC still far above Stanford.
Auburn still inexplicably ranked. The Auburn pre-season hype looks more and more ridiculous by the week. They weren’t even all that good the previous year, going .500 in conference play and losing their bowl game.
LikeLike
Nevermind about Ole Miss; I see them now.
But USC still being ranked above Stanford and Northwestern is a joke.
LikeLike
Richard,
“Pollsters are stupid.”
Illogical and/or uninformed might be more fair. They also are stubborn about their opinions of teams.
“‘Bama still far above Ole Miss.”
The only justification for keeping AL close to MS is that AL kept it close despite 5 TOs and that fluke TD catch. Also, they beat WI.
“USC still far above Stanford.”
I assume Stanford’s loss (only 6 pts) is being held against them more because it was NW.
“Auburn still inexplicably ranked. The Auburn pre-season hype looks more and more ridiculous by the week. They weren’t even all that good the previous year, going .500 in conference play and losing their bowl game.”
This is the weirdest one for me. Other than preseason hype, AU hasn’t shown anything in a while as you say.
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
And the AP poll.
1. OSU
2. MSU
3t. TCU
3t. MS
5. Baylor
6. ND
7. UGA
8. LSU
9. UCLA
10. FSU
Movers and B10:
12. AL
17. NW
19. USC
21. Stanford
22. WI
P12 – 6 (50%)
SEC – 6 (43%)
B12 – 4 (40%)
B10 – 4 (29%)
ACC – 3 (21%)
LikeLike
Ole Miss – I think the Rebels should be #1, so no problem with them jumping to #3.
Alabama – Dropped a bit too far to #12. Despite losing the turnover margin by 5, they still had a chance to beat Ole Miss. That’s not likely to happen again. I also don’t see another offense in the SEC capable of stressing the Alabama defense the way Ole Miss did. Maybe A&M.
LSU – Moved up five spots. In my view they are getting too much credit after beating what will turn out to be an average Auburn team, which is laughably still ranked in the coaches poll.
Northwestern – Looks like the writers are correcting themselves by moving NW up 6 spots after a good but not great showing against Duke.
Stanford – Should be ahead of USC
Missouri – Steadily dropping. Only a matter of time before they fall out but still ridiculous that they are ranked.
Tennessee – I said this last week, they should be ranked. I’m guessing the winner of Tennessee vs. Florida, which is receiving votes, ends up ranked next week. Also, don’t count out out Auburn from sneaking its way back into the top 25. They host Mississippi State, which is lurking at #26, this week.
LikeLike
Tom,
“Ole Miss – I think the Rebels should be #1, so no problem with them jumping to #3.
Alabama – Dropped a bit too far to #12. Despite losing the turnover margin by 5, they still had a chance to beat Ole Miss. That’s not likely to happen again. I also don’t see another offense in the SEC capable of stressing the Alabama defense the way Ole Miss did. Maybe A&M.”
At this stage, polls are largely circular logic. MS should rank high because they beat a good AL team, and AL is good because they kept it close against MS despite 5 TOs.
This is how the SEC keeps dominating the polls, because no conference loss ever hurts them.
LikeLike
Bret Bielema’s wanted his demise at Arkansas to follow at least 1 NYD-6 Bowl Appearance and dovetail with the expiration of Ferentz’ Iowa contract. Looks like he might be a couple of years and done instead.
LikeLike
Iowa wants him?
LikeLike
I wouldnt say that Iowa wants him ASAP, but probably feels he’s a backup plan who will be available when the Ferentz contract is up, given he is an alum/player and former assistant coach. But it look like Bielema will be short some monetary leverage when he does get booted by Arky.
LikeLike
Bielema is the hope for a significant minority of Iowa fans.
LikeLike
The B1G has declared Army a P5 team?
https://www.getmoresports.com/big-ten-is-a-weird-grandpa-ruler-king/
LikeLike
The SEC did that too.
The Big Ten has actually stated that they’ll consider Notre Dame, BYU, Army, Navy, UConn, and Cincinnati as meeting the P5 scheduling requirement. Mark Rudner, the Big Ten’s schedule guru, said that this was based on their RPI for the last 5-6 years. He also said they are open to adding more teams to that list. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Boise and Air Force.
The SEC counts ND, BYU, and Army towards their P5 requirement. The ACC counts ND and BYU only.
Despite Rudner’s mumbo-jumbo about RPI, it’s really about TV ratings. Army (historically the weakest of those teams) usually draws well on TV and in the stadium, even in years they aren’t very good.
LikeLike
http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2015/09/17/indiana-university-football-kevin-wilson-big-ten-conference-scheduling-jim-delany/32552461/
IU received an exception from the league to count Connecticut (2019, 2020) and Cincinnati (2021, 2022), both members of the American Athletic Conference, as “Power Five” opponents.
“We looked at their RPI for the last five or six years,” said Mark Rudner, the Big Ten’s senior associate commissioner. “If someone comes to us with a request, we’ll evaluate it. That’s what happened with these two. Those seemed to fit.”
Rudner said teams such as Notre Dame, an independent, obviously fit the spirit of the rule, which is to increase the level of competition.
Rudner said Big Ten has denied one request for an exemption and accepted another. He declined to name the schools.
I think it’s a function of who B10 teams have already scheduled. It’s also smart to count the better G5 teams as they are tougher games than the bottom of the P5 anyway. And the PR is always good for including the service academies. The last thing the P5 need to do is tick off government by not playing the academies.
LikeLike
I wonder which of Boise, Fresno, UCF, and USF was accepted and which denied.
MSU may not apply for an exemption for Boise because they may likely line up a P5 those years.
LikeLike
Noteworthy that Bucky moved USF out to 2019 from 2017.
My guess is that USF got denied while the other 3 were approved. Maybe Wisconsin and Illinois hope USF will get better in the meantime?
Otherwise, they may have to juggle a bit.
LikeLike
Perhaps they should REMOVE Kansas from the list.
LikeLike
Well, why not South Florida – they were in the last iteration (2005 – 2013) of the Big East also? Have the UCs been invited into a multi-year audition?
LikeLike
Because no B10 team has them on a schedule right now? Because no B10 team has applied to get USF exempted? Because UC and UConn won the BE to make a BCS bowl?
USF never won the BE. They won 14 games in the previous 4 seasons combined. They are basically UConn without the BCS game. My guess is nobody has asked about an exemption for them yet.
LikeLike
ACC might want to nominate Boise St.
LikeLike
More signs of changing times for the World Wide Leader.
http://thebiglead.com/2015/09/21/layoffs-are-coming-to-espn/
Multiple sources inside and outside of ESPN tell The Big Lead that the network will be laying off “200 to 300” employees in the coming months.
These are the first ESPN layoffs since 2013, and might not be the last, as Disney has notified ESPN to trim $100 million from the 2016 budget and $250 million in 2017.
LikeLike
http://thefieldsofgreen.com/2015/09/23/college-conferences-push-back-against-gambling-and-daily-fantasy/
The P5 conferences are pushing back against daily fantasy sports gambling. ESPN has already pulled their “Cover Alert” from CFB games. The P12 has said they will not accept ads from those companies.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/13720883/athletic-directors-debate-how-legislate-student-athlete-staff-participation-fantasy-leagues
Under NCAA rules, a player would lose a year of eligibility for playing fantasy sports for prizes as it is deemed gambling by the NCAA.
LikeLike
http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite
For those interested in recruiting rankings, this gives composite rankings for each current team as opposed to a single recruiting class. Think of it as a running average that helps smooth out the annual fluctuations.
LikeLike
Within the B1G, 6 of the 8 most talented teams are in the East (Nebraska and Wisconsin are 5 and 6, big gap between 5 and 6 though). The West is actually the higher rated division this year per Sagarin but the talent gap will only grow as PSU recovers from sanctions and Rutgers and Maryland hire better coaches (presumably).
Michigan State (#4 in the B1G) already has a more talented roster than Nebraska and these rankings do not include MSU 2016’s class, which is rated #12. MSU is just behind PSU for #3 but actually has a higher average recruit ranking. MSU will likely step back next year without Cook, but they won’t fall very far.
LikeLike
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2015/09/ucla_blocks_michigan_from_te_c.html
One of the worst rules in CFB rears its ugly head again. A player has left UCLA’s team and wants to transfer elsewhere. However, coach Jim Mora is blocking him from considering MI, MSU and OSU.
What? Are they too close to UCLA for you? None of them are on UCLA’s future schedules.
LikeLike
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/former-ucla-te-chris-clark-blocked-from-transferring-to-michigan–michigan-st—ohio-st-193356367.html
And UCLA has relented. Now he can go anywhere outside the P12 that isn’t on UCLA’s schedule for the next 4 years. He’s from NJ and is looking mostly at ACC schools.
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/09/24/big-12-could-ban-enrollment-freshmen-misconduct-history
The B12 is looking into banning incoming freshmen athletes with a history of violence. All P5 conference should be doing this.
LikeLike
Looks like there are rumors of ASU joining the Big Ten in hockey as an affiliate member. Interesting choice…that’s a lot of traveling for them to do.
LikeLike
There are a limited number of choices as to affiliation.
Once you’re on a plane the mileage difference is simply not a deal make or breaker.
LikeLike
Ross,
“Looks like there are rumors of ASU joining the Big Ten in hockey as an affiliate member. Interesting choice…that’s a lot of traveling for them to do.”
The Alaska schools make it work, so I’m guessing ASU and the B10 can afford it. There are lots of B10 alumni out there so attendance might be decent, too. Having more teams is good for the B10 in hockey. Six is a little weak.
Still, I’ve only heard rumors. Is there anything more substantial out there yet?
LikeLike
Nothing more than rumors, though they do appear to be coming from both sides, for what it’s worth.
LikeLike
Just curious, since I’m out of the hockey loop down here.
LikeLike
Unless there’s a Lazarus-like revival in Charlottesville, the Cavs will begin the search for a new football coach by the end of November.
LikeLike
Harsin probably is set up to take over for Strong or Sarkisian. As for UVA they have to join the FleckFuentestakes like several others.
LikeLike
I can’t imagine Strong getting fired this soon. He didn’t forget how to coach when he got to Texas after so much success at Louisville. He just has to get his guys in, and I suspect there will be a massive turnaround next year, if not by November of this year.
LikeLike
He won’t get fired this soon. But he has stupid teams, makes stupid decisions and has his teams look poorly prepared. And his teams usually get killed in the 3rd quarter which is a clear reflection on the coach. And Hartsin will never get hired in Texas. He was horrible as an offensive coordinator. He needs to stick in the MWC where he only plays P5 level teams occasionally.
That said, it sure looked like some bettors had the fix in for the Oklahoma St. game. There was a defensive holding call on a lineman on an offensive lineman on a running play when the offensive lineman had his arms wrapped around the defensive player. When Strong complained, he got an unsportsmanlike conduct very quickly. I’ve never seen the first call and haven’t found anyone else who has either and I’ve never seen unsportsmanlike on the coach in the college game. Those two calls set Oklahoma St. up for a tying FG.
LikeLike
Texas lost after Strong called TO on a 3rd and 10 at the Texas 25 with 48 seconds left when it looked like OSU intended to let the clock run out and go into OT. Texas didn’t make the FD and OSU got it with 42 seconds left. For the 2nd week in a row UT’s kicker made an inexplicable mistake, this time just dropping the snap and having to rush off a 10 yard punt leaving OSU in FG range. If Strong doesn’t call that TO, it goes to OT.
LikeLike
Realistically, you have to give a coach 4 years. BUT, if you are at a major program like Texas and you are not showing signs of improvement, 3 years may be all you get.
Most recent example of this was Rich Rodriguez at Michigan. He went from 3-9 in year 1. 5-7 in year 2, 7-6 in year 3, but the improvement was not enough and he was gone. For what it’s worth, I felt he should have gotten one more year but I couldn’t fault the AD for making the change (although I fault him for replacing Rodriguez with Hoke).
LikeLike
I’ve never seen unsportsmanlike on the coach in the college game. Those two calls set Oklahoma St. up for a tying FG.
Bo Pelini would earn them every once in a while.
LikeLike
Bo would have had 6 or 7 a game if they called them like they did on Strong Saturday.
LikeLike
B12 officials jealous of the attention the B1G and PAC officials regularly receive?
LikeLike
Laughing!
For the first time since Saturday night. Texas fans are pretty irate. Most of the calls could be justified as typical bad breaks on close calls going against you, but the last two-the defensive holding and unsportsmanlike on the coach were inexplicable.
Shaun King (so far as I know) has no Texas connections. Pretty much everyone else talking about it are Texas fans. He has a gif of the unsportsmanlike penalty. He describes it as borderline fixing.
http://sports.yahoo.com/video/mad-king-ridiculous-wronging-texas-213941986.html
LikeLike
Not having been a fan of a “King” (other than a brief youthful infatuation with the Yankees) I have long seen kings benefit more often than not from what seems to be biased officiating. Unlike some of my friends I’ve never wanted it to go the other way. If a sporting event is to mean anything the rules need to be enforced consistently, evenly, and fairly. That was so egregious I find myself supporting a king. In fact, you really wonder what Vegas has to say. If I ran a book I’d take B12 games off the board (unless I had some inside info…).
LikeLike
If Maryland doesn’t beat UVa to the punch. After today’s 45-6 humiliation at WVU, the fan base wants Edsall gone. At Testudo Times, many are even calling for the Terps to hire Tressel, which isn’t happening.
LikeLike
@vp19
Do you pull the trigger now on Edsall and risk the recruiting class? I only ask because I think it was known that Maryland would take a step back this season and not be very good after having to replace a lot of key players from a year ago.
LikeLike
It should be easier to hire a new coach with B1G membership and new facilities on the horizon than it was at the end of 2010, when Maryland was an ACC member with financial problems.
LikeLike
Wow! Michigan’s close loss to Utah, actually a game they should have won, exposes Sparty – a team that has looked mediocre thus far. When OSU looks bad, you can tell they won’t play that way for long due to talent, coaching & motivation. MSU, not sure the talent is there to make sudden changes, esp in game.
Michigan is looking more and more like the pain in the behind they were for so long in the BIG & that’s not good for OSU.
I was going through BYU’s history, I couldn’t find them being shut out since at least 2011. Sure they’ve had equivalent losses or greater to today’s Michigan loss, but no shut outs. I stopped looking past 2011.
NW was sloppy against a decent Ball State team, but still won.
It looks like 5 BIG teams in the top 25 tomorrow.
MAC is getting better and Bowling Green ends the season 2-0 against the BIG, albeit Maryland & Purdue look to be the worst BIG teams. Edsall’s days are numbered. Maryland could be a decent football school with a good coach, nice talent in the area.
Minnesota’s terrible qb runs a great 2 minute offense, well at least against Colorado State and Ohio. This team would be ranked and undefeated if even a mediocre offense.
LikeLike
Thorson is a redshirt freshman and will make freshman mistakes. He’s very inconsistent and thus, so is NU’s offense (which alternates between acceptable and awful).
We had a dominating defense (and Stanford and Duke is really making that unit look good), but the D suffered a ton of injuries in the Ball St. game. Hope they aren’t serious. After being decimated by injuries, in the second half, the NU defense allowed their first TD this season in 4 games where the opponent had to start from outside FG range (the first 2 TD’s they gave up this season, the opponent got the ball inside the ‘Cats’ 30 yardline thanks to awful turnovers by the offense).
Minny-NU could be a M00N game.
LikeLike
Undefeated and 1 loss teams after 4 weeks
________________________________________________
ACC / P5 / 14 teams
(4) | 4-0 NC State + 3-0 Clemson, Florida State, and Miami
(5) | 3-1 Syracuse, Boston College, Duke, and UNC + 2-1 Pittsburgh
B12 / P5 / 10 teams
(6) | 4-0 Oklahoma St and TCU + 3-0 Oklahoma, Baylor, Kansas St, and West Virginia
(1) | 3-1 Texas Tech
B1G / P5 / 14 teams
(5) | 4-0 Indiana, Michigan State, Ohio State, Iowa, and Northwestern
(5) | 3-1 Penn State, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, and Wisconsin
PAC / P5 / 12 teams
(3) | 4-0 California, UCLA, and Utah
(5) | 3-1 Stanford, Southern Cal, Colorado, and Arizona + 2-1 Washington State
SEC / P5 / 14 teams
(5) | 4-0 Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas A&M + 3-0 LSU
(4) | 3-1 Kentucky, Missouri, Mississippi State, and Alabama
IND / ?? / 3 teams
(1) | 4-0 Notre Dame
————————————————
AAC / G5 / 12 teams
(4) | 4-0 Memphis + 3-0 Temple, Navy, and Houston
(1) | 2-1 Tulsa
CUSA / G5 / 13 teams
(2) | 3-1 Western Kentucky and Marshall
MAC / G5 / 13 teams
(1) | 3-0 Toledo
(1) | 3-1 Ohio
MWC / G5 / 12 teams
(2) | 3-1 Boise State + 2-1 Air Force
SUN / G5 / 11 teams
(2) | 3-1 Georgia Southern + 2-1 Appalachian State
LikeLike
It’s been a pretty strange season so far. None of the top teams have looked consistently great (many have bumbled through multiple games) and there have been some crazy upsets. Utah blowing out OR on the road?
Not a lot of changes at the top of the polls, but plenty of fresh faces at the bottom.
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches poll:
1. OSU
2. MSU
LikeLike
WTF? Sorry about that. To continue:
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches poll:
1. OSU
2. MSU
3. TCU
4. Baylor
5. MS
6. UGA
7. ND
8. LSU
9. FSU
10. UCLA
12. Utah +5
17. NW +2
18. WI + 3
24t. OR – 11
26. MI (that Utah loss looks a lot better now)
SEC – 7 (50%)
P12 – 6 (50%)
B12 – 5 (50%)
B10 – 4 (29%)
ACC – 2 (14%)
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
AP poll:
1. OSU
2. MSU
3. MS
4. TCU
5. Baylor
6. ND
7. UCLA
8. UGA
9. LSU
10. Utah +8
16. NW +1
19. WI +3
22. MI
P12 – 6 (50%)
B12 – 5 (50%)
SEC – 6 (43%)
B10 – 5 (36%)
ACC – 2 (14%)
LikeLike
May not actually be strange.
May just be the case that Utah and UMich are better than people thought they would be in preseason while Oregon, MSU, and TCU (and maybe OSU) are worse.
The UMich-MSU game will tell us a lot.
LikeLike
Could be quite the showdown if Michigan gets by Maryland and Northwestern.
I don’t see them having issues with Maryland, given how Maryland has played this year (though the Hoke years have made me inherently scared of all road games).
Northwestern will be interesting. They appear to have one of the top B1G defenses, especially after Stanford and Duke put up some points this past weekend. My biggest question is will Michigan be able to sustain some offense against them? That would show real improvement to me on that side of the ball. I don’t see the defense having problems given how unimpressive NU’s offense has been this year.
The UM-MSU game could certainly make for an attractive gameday location if UM is 5-1 and MSU is 6-0. Could be something like #2 MSU @ #15 UM
LikeLike
PAC stands firm against AT&T deal so no carriage on DirectTV.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/09/14/the-directv-miss-and-the-future-of-the-pac-12-networks/
LikeLike
De ja vue?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/aac/2015/09/29/larry-brown-smu-ncaa-sanctions-supsension-postseason-ban/73021116/
LikeLike
Time for a rogues developmental league – SMU and Miami-FL can be charter members. Friends of mine who are Pony alums are livid that UNC has thus far gotten off for what they feel is far worse (fake classes, fake academic program).
LikeLike
Big win for NCAA:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxM4wdtZ5uI-V3BZN1NaZTl6WUk/view?pli=1
$5,000 payment thrown out. Cost of Attendance kept.
LikeLike
Agreed. Most headlines will read NCAA lost the anti trust accusation, but it appears FCOA is all the remedy required. I find the mentions of the need/ability for college sport to remain amateur, and the ability of the governing organization to prescribe the methods, most telling. They simply said if you’re saying you are being compensated by being able to play in order to go to school, make sure that is actually a true statement, i.e. FCOA. Nothing more required.
I guess we can stand down from the Northwestern, Stanford, etc watch.
LikeLike
I still think we’ll see a point in the future, probably in CBB simply due to the number of players on a team, where a game is revving up to begin, and the players are going to refuse to play.
Football is much more difficult, I think, since you need far more players to agree. I could definitely see a single team of players in basketball banding together over the issues involved here.
LikeLike
Players refusing to play? Cut them! And ask for the value of all accrued FCOA to be returned. They aren’t being forced to go to college. I’d rather watch/support substitutes from a dorm rec league than allow that attitude.
LikeLike
Let me guess – you are over 50, white, Republican and male. If the help gets uppity, just fire them. The schools make millions, but don’t give the players anything.
LikeLike
Except tuition, room and board, books, tutoring, and a stipend. Other than all that, you are correct.
LikeLike
Mark:
Yes, yes, no, and yes. How exactly do those personal statistics alter the argument just restated yesterday in the O’Bannon appeal? “In this case, the NCAA’s rules have been more restrictive than necessary to maintain its tradition of amateurism in support of the college sports market. The Rule of Reason requires that the NCAA permit its schools to provide up to the cost of attendance to their student athletes. It does not require more.”
LikeLike
Craig Z:
You left out a few things the schools are providing above the mandated minimum: trainers, coaches, nutritionists, tutors, medical, facilities/stadiums, payment for staffing/operating and maintaining same, travel expenses/arrangements, an AD that arranges competitions, promotion of the athletic events, sum oozing the alumni that few players even recognize, arrangement of schedules in order to compete, and negotiated the broadcasts of these spectacles without which the players notoriety would be extremely limited.
LikeLike
The court case basically just said the NCAA had to treat the players no different than other students. Previously, they were treating them worse as other students could potentially get COA in scholarships or financial aid.
LikeLike
None of these items are provided just for the benefit of the student – they are provided so the school can make money. One of the best parts of the NFL is the honesty that it is about cash – college football is a joke because legions of old white guys act like it is about students representing schools for fun when it is really just the NFL with no salaries, different marketing and an inferior product.
There is not one P5 football team that has similar demographics to the student body. Do you think the Notre Dame student body looks remotely similar to the football team? How many out of state football players does Nebraska have compared to the university as a whole? Is 20% of Ohio State’s student body from Florida?
The amazing part is that the NCAA and the schools have convinced people that a scholarship is great compensation when in reality a scholarship essentially costs the school nothing. Just because a school says it costs $40k a year doesn’t mean that it is worth that.
LikeLike
“None of these items are provided just for the benefit of the student – they are provided so the school can make money.”
Do you begrudge non profit organizations the ability to create revenue streams that further their mission? In the NCAA, as far as I’m aware, GCU is the only for profit member. The kids are not being held against their will. They are free to choose an alternative. They aren’t free to dictate how the member schools organize and operate (unless you are majority stock holder in GCU. Then I guess you could dictate to that school).
LikeLike
“No, they don’t. They gross millions (very few gross over $100M and none over $200M) but they generally spend more than they gross. They do redistribute significant revenue from CFB and MBB to other sports, but that isn’t the same as the school making money. Some of those other sports are literally required in order for the CFB and MBB teams to exist (NCAA has a minimum number of teams requirement and Title IX requires a balance between genders). In additions, tens of millions of dollars go right back into those revenue sports (facilities, recruiting, scholarships, staff/tutors/advisors, coaches, etc).”
The choice that colleges make to waste money and fund sports that few care about and even fewer play with the proceeds of football and basketball does not change the fact that ALL P5 schools and most G5 schools make a profit from football and men’s basketball. They may hide the profit, lie about the profit, make up fake intercompany charges or waste the profit on water polo, stadiums used 6 times a year or weight rooms better than those in the NFL, but the profit exists.
The players MUST receive part of this profit since they create the value. The issue will not go away until the colleges PAY the athletes their fair share in $$ not “free” tuition & food. Instead of being proactive, the NCAA and schools are digging in and they will continue to lose in court (as they should).
“Not everywhere. There are minorities and women in power in places, too. It’s almost impossible not to have older people in power since that’s how life works and we’re talking about college age people.”
Please provide the name of the P5 conference that is not led by an old white man. Please provide the % of P5 presidents that are not old white men. Please name the sports TV networks that are not led by old white men. If the NCAA old boy network allowed more women and minorities into the power structure, they might realize how out of touch they are with 2015 America. Instead we get the “father knows best” approach, shut up and be happy with your scholarship (that we might pull if you’re not good enough and by the way you can’t major in a real subject) while I make $100Million that will not succeed like it did in 1956. Change or die.
LikeLike
This conversation is over. Let them take their value and go start an actual pro minor league, or join an existing one, since “they create the value.” It doesn’t matter that you don’t understand what constitutes profit, and it won’t change no matter how many times you state otherwise. But they won’t, because they know where the value of college athletics is – in the colleges.
LikeLike
As an aside, with the number of horrific incidents on campuses recently I’d suggest ending with evolve or go extinct. It makes the same point in a more acceptable phrase.
LikeLike
Sports other than football or basketball are more in the collegiate model and more in line with what was intended when college sports started. Texas built Memorial Stadium as much for track as they did for football.
I’d like to know how many of the players would be worth the money in tuition, expenses, coaching and facilities that they get. The college costs are around 40k. Coaching and facilities probably pushes it up well over 100k for the P5 programs. How many of them will earn 100k when they graduate? How many would get jobs in the pros as freshmen?
Reality is that there are only a handful who aren’t overpaid.
LikeLike
Mark,
“The choice that colleges make to waste money and fund sports that few care about and even fewer play”
Your lack of comprehension is a real shame.
“the fact that ALL P5 schools and most G5 schools make a profit from football and men’s basketball.”
ND used to claim to lose money on MBB in its reporting to the federal government. That may change now that they are an ACC member.
“They may hide the profit, lie about the profit, make up fake intercompany charges …”
In other words, any evidence that shows you’re wrong will be immediately dismissed out of hand as a trick. Gotcha.
“stadiums used 6 times a year or weight rooms better than those in the NFL”
You mean those stadiums that are full of seats people way too much to fill and where the teams play their games? The weight rooms that recruits compare and contrast ion deciding where to play? Yes, what a waste. I’m sure none of that can be viewed as reinvestment for the future good of that team.
“The players MUST receive part of this profit since they create the value.”
Maybe if you shout more it’ll make more people agree with you. And where is the evidence that they create the value as opposed to the school name on the jersey?
“The issue will not go away until the colleges PAY the athletes their fair share in $$ not “free” tuition & food.”
Despite a court just saying otherwise.
“Instead of being proactive, the NCAA and schools are digging in and they will continue to lose in court (as they should).”
He says after they just won in court on a major point.
“Please provide the name of the P5 conference that is not led by an old white man.”
The COP/C runs the B10, and it has 3 women and 2 minority men on it (not counting religions as a minority). Delany works for them, not the other way around. Similarly there are 2 women and 3 minority men serving as B10 ADs. OSU is one of the biggest voices in NCAA sports and it has a minority president and a minority AD (neither of whom support pay for play).
Larry Scott is 50.
“Please provide the % of P5 presidents that are not old white men.”
No. Do your own homework. It’s 36% for the B10, a non-negligible percentage. Besides, what counts as old?
“Please name the sports TV networks that are not led by old white men.”
The head of ESPN isn’t 60 and his boss is a little younger than him. How young do you expect the head of a multi-billion dollar business to be?
“If the NCAA old boy network”
The NCAA is just a collection of university presidents plus staff. Every school has its own old boy network and academics also have one, but to blame the NCAA just reinforces your lack of comprehension.
“(that we might pull if you’re not good enough and by the way you can’t major in a real subject)”
Nice strawman, but the schools are moving back to 4 year scholarships that can only be revoked for cause. And few schools restrict the majors you can take. GT requires all students to take calculus, athletes included. OSU won a national title in 2002 with a molecular genetics major as the starting QB. FSU had a Rhodes scholar as a star safety. Most athletes choose an easier path, but few are forced into it. Some majors are very time consuming so it makes it hard to make practice and players are warned about that. They can always quit playing football and major in whatever they want since they’re already admitted students.
“while I make $100Million that will not succeed like it did in 1956.”
The Red Cross had $3B in revenue last year, the bastards. Why don’t they give blood donors their fair share?
“Change or die.”
Same to you.
LikeLike
They’d all lose their scholarships instantly and other players would quickly fill those spots.
LikeLike
Bowlsby predicted it would happen the other day.
Basketball is the easiest to justify as there are minor leagues they could play in.
LikeLike
Which is where they belong if that is there goal, not in school.
LikeLike
bullet,
“Bowlsby predicted it would happen the other day.”
I didn’t say it wouldn’t happen, I just predicted the outcome if/when it does happen. I believe there are plenty of players dumb enough to try it.
“Basketball is the easiest to justify as there are minor leagues they could play in.”
There is no justification for the proposed action. You can make excuses and provide reasons, but it doesn’t justify it. Players can get out of the deal any time they wish if they find the conditions too onerous. Besides, the existence of the NBADL makes it less justifiable since they had an option that includes a salary.
LikeLike
I was saying basketball is the easiest to justify the amateurism as they do have alternatives.
LikeLike
No body/organization needs to justify themselves because of what other organizations, completely unrelated in any direct way, offers. I agree it makes the argument much easier, but it is actually irrelevant.
LikeLike
By the argument I mean that they have multiple alternatives if they want to get paid. But it doesn’t address the argument that colleges do/don’t need to pay, alternatives or not.
LikeLike
Maybe, maybe not. If an entire basketball team said they weren’t playing, where would the school turn? It’s not like they can pick up players mid-season, let alone an entire team of players. If it spread to other schools, would all of the schools just cut the scholarships and what, forfeit the season?
LikeLike
Ross,
“Maybe, maybe not. If an entire basketball team said they weren’t playing, where would the school turn? It’s not like they can pick up players mid-season, let alone an entire team of players.”
Sure they can. Have open tryouts on campus and give out 13 scholarships to the best ones. You’ll fill the team right away. You can get transfers to help rebuild the roster for future seasons.
“If it spread to other schools, would all of the schools just cut the scholarships and what, forfeit the season?”
Nope, they’d play regular students. Plenty of people would love a free ride in exchange for playing hoops.
LikeLike
A basketball team refusing to play would be the ultimate embarrassment for a school and it would cause a lot of attention that the NCAA doesn’t want. Especially if it happened at UNC, UK or Kansas. There would be no replacements, the coach would be fired and the school would be put in a really tough place. If you “get rid of” the students, the school admit that it is a business and not an extra activity and the sham is exposed.
LikeLike
Mark:
You seem to overestimate the place and value of basketball to a major (or small for that matter) university. Sports are a combination educational activity, and a marketing arm of the real and actually far more valuable/important departments of the U. It would be a bit embarrassing, but insignificant in the longer term. The real money is elsewhere. See: U$C “stealing” near $190M of research funds and projects from a single UCSD department. That is extreme, but that is the kind of money involved in lots of depts in a lot of schools. Dropping sports all together would be small impact long run, and releive admins of a lot of headache. Personally, I’d like to see it happen (an attempt at extortion) just to set the example rather than have to make these arguments.
LikeLike
“legions of old white guys act like…”
Ah yes, Mark, this is how you win an argument on the internet! Don’t argue merits…instead try to cast it as a racial issue (showing your own bigotry in the process)! That way people won’t try to use reason! Of course, resorting to such tactics is a strong indication that you feel you don’t have reason on your side.
Now, about the general argument:
There is nothing a university can do to stop any player from leaving a school one morning and signing a professional contract that afternoon. If he/she is in good academic & financial standing, there is nothing a university can do to stop a student from playing professional sports while still attending the school.
The NCAA does not stop anyone from getting paid to play sports; the NCAA does nothing to stop a professional league from forming in any sport. The NCAA only has the power to regulate people who willingly decide to play for the NCAA.
The fact that the NCAA only allows amateurs to represent its universities in its sporting events doesn’t stop people from getting paid to play sports.
If you want to argue it’s unfair that a professional league like the NBA & NFL don’t allow 18 year-olds to play for them, that’s fine. A lot of people who support the NCAA have think the same thing. But that argument is with the NBA & NFL, not with the NCAA.
If the players were worth what is claimed, then another professional league would have sprung up already. They could sign those 18-19 year-olds and just pay them half what they are supposedly “worth”, and keep the other half for operating expenses + profit. The fact that this hasn’t happened is evidence that the players don’t bring the value that is claimed; it is in fact the schools that the provide the popularity behind the NCAA.
Yes, all the players from Kansas, Kentucky, and UNC could decide they don’t want to represent their university any more; the universities would go on. College athletics would go on. The universities would play walk-ons, and eventually find other people who would like scholarships (or not…college sports could go on just fine if there were no scholarships). People don’t watch college athletics to watch the best athletes at the sport; they watch the professional leagues for that.
It’s not like we don’t know what happens when the top 18 year-olds in a sport decide not to represent a university. Not that long ago, most of the best basketball players were going straight to the NBA right out of high school. NCAA basketball went on, with little indication that its popularity was hurt. If the top 18 year-olds again decide not to play for the NCAA, whether because they’re going to a professional league or decide simply not to play for the NCAA, the NCAA will still be fine.
If you don’t like the idea of colleges allowing students to represent them in sporting events against other colleges with a few basic rules (like they have to be amateurs & in good academic standing), don’t watch the games, and don’t donate money to their athletic programs.
LikeLike
You talk around the problem, but miss the point – the schools are making $100s of millions from free labor. This cannot continue. Either change or die. If it was just local schools playing for fun, nobody would care. But the schools decided to turn it into a business, and a business needs to pay its workers.
People absolutely watch college sports just as they do pro sports. Almost all of the good & supported college teams are in markets where no pro teams exist. If an NBA team showed up in Lexington, UK would begin to decline. If the NFL went to Columbus, Ohio State would go into a long decline. Don’t kid yourself, NCAA football and basketball are the minor leagues, and they perform best in places without pro competition.
Last, since old white guys are in power, they are the ones preventing change while younger, often minority former athletes that got taken advantage of are fighting back.
LikeLike
You miss the point. Save GCU, all NCAA members are non profit. Revenue generated supports that model. It pays for part, and in a few cases all of athletic dept expenses. Would these athletes make money if they started a pro league on their own? Maybe a bit if they can find coaches, facilities, insurence, etc and an investor to bankroll the startup years. Again, just because a non profit generates significant revenue that doesn’t require it to suddenly become a for profit business. Or require it to be co-opted by a small, transient group of students.
The court didn’t require that FCOA be given. It said the NCAA rules keeping scholarship awards to lower than FCOA were too limiting for those willing/wanting to award at the FCOA level. Schools/conferences can chose to award less (some Go5 schools), or no athletics based at all (Ivy’s).
LikeLike
Mark, none of the players are being forced to accept scholarships. Yes, a handful every year in football or basketball could potentially make real money if they really got paid for their services.
If the top 200 high school football players and top 50 mens basketball players each year went to a pro league in Europe, college sports would not miss a beat.
Of course many thousands of minority students are given scholarships by rotten old white men every year. These are kids with no thought of going pro and no chance to go to college without aid due to sports. Yes it is a terrible system providing scholarships to all of those kids. In addition, there are lots of poor minority (and even white (oh no)) kids who get into colleges because they are athletes and then get financial aid because they are poor. Yes, blow up the whole system for the very few. Screw all of those kids from the inner city who escape through sports.
LikeLike
Mark,
“You talk around the problem, but miss the point”
Or do they miss your point while you miss theirs?
“the schools are making $100s of millions from free labor.”
No, they don’t. They gross millions (very few gross over $100M and none over $200M) but they generally spend more than they gross. They do redistribute significant revenue from CFB and MBB to other sports, but that isn’t the same as the school making money. Some of those other sports are literally required in order for the CFB and MBB teams to exist (NCAA has a minimum number of teams requirement and Title IX requires a balance between genders). In additions, tens of millions of dollars go right back into those revenue sports (facilities, recruiting, scholarships, staff/tutors/advisors, coaches, etc).
“This cannot continue.”
Of course it can.
“But the schools decided to turn it into a business, and a business needs to pay its workers.”
Seems to me a court just said paying them via a scholarship was fine.
“People absolutely watch college sports just as they do pro sports.”
Some do, some don’t. It depends on the fan and the schools in question.
“Almost all of the good & supported college teams are in markets where no pro teams exist.”
Very few markets have pro teams and most major colleges aren’t in big cities, so your statement is almost meaningless. Also, the location of good teams changes with time. Miami did just fine in the 80s and 90s with the Dolphins around. UCLA hoops was a dynasty with the Lakers in town. ND football thrived right by Chicago with tons of NYC fans. USC did fine in the 70s with the Rams around. OSU has two NFL teams in easy driving distance. MI is right next to the Lions. UT isn’t far from Dallas or Houston. LSU is quite close to New Orleans.
Of course a local pro team will steal the headlines after a while. Nobody debates that.
“Last, since old white guys are in power,”
Not everywhere. There are minorities and women in power in places, too. It’s almost impossible not to have older people in power since that’s how life works and we’re talking about college age people.
“they are the ones preventing change”
Sometimes, yes. They also point out that not all change is good. And they aren’t always wrong on those positions either. You seem to have missed that concept along the way.
“while younger, often minority former athletes that got taken advantage of are fighting back.”
Right, like all those poor white guys that got free rides to NW for being potentially an above average college football player. What a terrible thing to have almost no NFL future but still get an elite education for free.
You assume that these people were taken advantage of but don’t bother to offer any evidence. Not everybody agrees with your opinion on that issue.
LikeLike
“You talk around the problem, but miss the point – the schools are making $100s of millions from free labor.”
Well, you missed my point then. If the athletes were really worth that much, then investors would hire them away for their own league. If the players are worth, say, $500 million (in line with your $100s of millions), they could give the players $250 million in salary and then use the other $250 million for operating costs and profit to themselves.
The fact that no investors have ever stepped forward and make such a league work is evidence that the players don’t have a value that high. Yes, the universities are getting revenue in the millions to support their athletic departments that have expenses in the millions, but it’s the schools that provide the majority of the value, not the athletes.
LikeLike
I am not so sure it’s such a “big win” for the NCAA. If it stands (meaning that the anti-trust laws apply to them), they remain open to further attack, and if you are open to attack, eventually some of the bombs will land.
LikeLike
It was very much a mixed bag. The appeals court basically threw out the $5k based on a narrow set of facts established as largely a sideshow to the main testimony – essentially saying that as long as the facts are consistent with amateurism being an effective marketing device, it was OK to have restrictions consistent with the definition of amateurism.
Also (and I do think this is important), they basically established that there should generally be a standard of deference to the NCAA’s ability to regulate its own affairs, and pretty much explicitly threw out the idea of considering this to be a per se antitrust violation.
On the other hand, they basically reiterated that a LOT of the NCAA’s other defenses (the BoR dicta, the idea that the whole thing isn’t REALLY commercial, the idea that somehow producers aren’t protected by Sherman, etc etc) were bogus. I also thought it notable that they explicitly rejected the logic from Bassett case (“we believe Bassett was simply wrong on this point” – the Basset case argument being that rules against player compensation were “anti-commercial” and therefore somehow exempt), which definitely seems to open up another can of worms for the NCAA to deal with.
LikeLike
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2016/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/100
Times Higher Education released their rankings (which are probably my favorite of all the ranking publications) today. I haven’t had much time to look at them yet, but here they are.
LikeLike
They go to the top 800 this year instead of only 500. You see some schools that typically weren’t ranked-Auburn, Kansas St., Texas Tech, Miami, Ohio U. and others.
LikeLike
B10 and expansion schools (World ranking):
11. JHU
21. MI
25. NW
36. IL
50. WI
65. MN
75. PSU
90. OSU
99. MSU
113. PU
117. UMD
123. RU
201-250. IN, IA
301-350. NE
20. Duke
41. GT
46. UT
63. UNC
79. Pitt
87. Vandy
101. Rice
108. ND
147. UVA
161. Miami
189. ASU (hockey)
190. BC
201-250. FSU
251-300. NCSU, SU, VT
301-350. UConn
501-600. OkSU
>801. OU
This is why I struggle to see the B10 accepting OU. I know it’s just one ranking and not the one the B10 uses, but it’s somewhat indicative of OU’s reputation.
LikeLike
One thing to keep in mind is that THE relies on self reported data that not all schools chose to provide (Texas and Texas A&M for example did not participate in the initial rankings released 5 years ago).
I mention this because it would explain Oklahoma’s absence. It’s possible they just missed the cut, but I have never seen an academic ranking where Okie St. finished above OU (and this is coming from someone whose parents both went to OSU)
LikeLike
The same is probably true for Kansas which also went unranked.
LikeLike
That’s certainly possible, yes. OU was in the 301-350 group in the THE rankings last year, so OU must have been left off the list for some reason. Even being in that group puts them in a questionable spot for me.
LikeLike
Interesting. OU is 401-500 in the ARWU rankings, same as Oklahoma St. and Texas Tech.
LikeLike
This has been discussed before, but I would continue to keep an eye on Miami. Not AAU, but per these rankings, (which incorporate research), it is well ahead of Indiana, Iowa, and Nebraska.
LikeLike
On the AAU ranking where Nebraska was kicked out of the AAU, Miami (FL) was one of the top ranked schools not currently in the AAU. They were 59th overall and excluding specialized and medical schools, they were 6th among schools not members-behind Dartmouth, Utah, UC-Santa Cruz, RPI and Wake Forest.
LikeLike
Only 10 P5 schools did not make the list, with 9 from the B12 and SEC. Academics better than Texas Tech is setting the bar fairly low. ACC: Louisville SEC: Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Mississippi State; B12: Baylor, TCU, West Virginia, Oklahoma, and Kansas. So except for OU, KS and maybe AL the usual suspects for a ranking with research weighted (why TCU & Baylor are not ranked).
LikeLike
Not a fan of the THE rankings. They use bogus criteria like how international the faculty and student body are (which boosts the British and other European schools as they have a bunch of tiny countries close to each other).
Otherwise, it’s almost a pure research ranking like ARWU.
LikeLike
Richard,
“Otherwise, it’s almost a pure research ranking like ARWU.”
I think that’s too strong.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ranking-methodology-2016
30% of the score is based on teaching criteria (reputation, faculty:student ratio, etc). Research is also 30% (reputation, $$$ and papers produced). Granted, another 30% is based on citations of their work, but I’d contend that influences their academic reputation significantly as well. Only 7.5% is based on international diversity at all levels with the last 2.5% being based on knowledge transfer to business.
LikeLike
And the bad performances and upsets continue:
#1, #2, #11, #20 and #24 squeak by. #25 kills #3. #5 yields 35 points to an unranked team. #12 beats #6. #7 gets upset at home. #8 gets embarrassed at home by #13. #9 pulled away late from EMU. #19 lost at home.
LikeLike
We may find out that OSU and MSU (and Wisconsin and Nebraska) were overranked in the preseason while Northwestern, Iowa, and UMich were underranked.
Oregon is turning out to be a paper tiger this year while VTech is close to dreadful, so arguably, we don’t actually know how good OSU and MSU are this year as they haven’t played anyone of significance yet.
LikeLike
And neither will for another week, although Rutgers will be at home vs. MSU, which could help. OSU should toy with a Maryland program in disarray, and a majority of Terp fans wish Edsall would fall on his sword so the search for a new coach can begin in earnest.
LikeLike
http://maryland.247sports.com/Article/BREAKING-Maryland-Planning-to-Fire-Randy-Edsall-During-Bye-Week-40044257
Stories are starting to come out that Edsall will be fired next week (UMD’s bye week) barring a last minute change of heart (like if UMD beats OSU).
.
LikeLike
There is joy in College Park over the likely dismissal of Edsall. It will be interesting to see who’s interested in the job, which could — I emphasize, could –– be a good one, what with B1G memebership, the new facilities and UnderArmour support. But there will have to be a huge culture change among Terp fans, many of whom still treat football as a prelim to hoops. And that may dissuade some coaches from pursuing the post when other schools’ environments are more football-oriented.
LikeLike
What’s Greg Schiano doing these days?
LikeLike
Richard,
“We may find out that OSU and MSU (and Wisconsin and Nebraska) were overranked in the preseason while Northwestern, Iowa, and UMich were underranked.”
It’s a national thing, not just a B10 problem. Nobody at the top has consistently looked strong. I’ll take 5-0 and playing ugly over not being 5-0 though.
“Oregon is turning out to be a paper tiger this year while VTech is close to dreadful, so arguably, we don’t actually know how good OSU and MSU are this year as they haven’t played anyone of significance yet.”
We could also remember that both of their starting QBs have been injured so they aren’t the same teams MSU and OSU faced. And that MSU has suffered some serious injuries so their team has changed and may need time to gel with the new players. And how do we really know anyone has faced anyone of significance yet? The season isn’t half over.
LikeLike
Think its wide open this year. Nobody is dominant. We might not have any unbeatens and might have more than 1 2 loss conference champ.
LikeLike
bullet,
Sorry about your team. UT fans have to just be sick watching what’s happening this year. I don’t know if Strong will be there long enough to fix the problems or even if he can fix them.
LikeLike
After the continued bad defense against Rice and Cal (the defense was young, but I expected a turnaround like last year), I became convinced we had hired a Pellini. Good for 8 or 9 wins, but not any better. Not sure we even have that now. OU is a season unto itself, so there’s still time for redemption. If they don’t show up for OU, its going to be a REALLY long season.
LikeLike
Speaking of long, any of you watch the Alabama-UGA game? There were definitely two TV timeouts in the first quarter and it seemed like there must have been 5 or 6 in the game. I never remember more than a couple in a whole game I had been to before. Is CBS flooding football with commercials? Maybe that’s why the SEC’s ratings are down this year.
I also have rarely watched prime time TV since at least the 80s and was trying to watch the last half of Quantico Sunday night. The first show was good, but this was a disjointed disaster. What made it worse, was it must have been 50% commercials. It was worse than USA or TBS. Seems like the regular networks are flooding shows with commercials as well. They’re going to drive the Netflix and DVR migrations.
LikeLike
Remember when subscription cable was just starting, and one of it’s supposed benefits was sub fees would reduce the need for advertising?
Nice idea…
LikeLike
bullet,
“Speaking of long, any of you watch the Alabama-UGA game?”
Parts of it, but it was too lopsided to stick with.
“There were definitely two TV timeouts in the first quarter and it seemed like there must have been 5 or 6 in the game. I never remember more than a couple in a whole game I had been to before. Is CBS flooding football with commercials? Maybe that’s why the SEC’s ratings are down this year.”
All the networks are getting worse about it. It’s how they pay for those increased rights fees they keep offering.
“I also have rarely watched prime time TV since at least the 80s and was trying to watch the last half of Quantico Sunday night. The first show was good, but this was a disjointed disaster.”
Doing a show with that many flashback sequences is not a wise choice in my opinion. They will quickly confuse the audience and prevent any new viewers from joining in.
“What made it worse, was it must have been 50% commercials. It was worse than USA or TBS. Seems like the regular networks are flooding shows with commercials as well. They’re going to drive the Netflix and DVR migrations.”
Yes, TV has gotten really bad that way.
LikeLike
“Is CBS flooding football with commercials?”
I’ve seen some SEC fans claim that CBS runs more commercials than ESPN for their games. I haven’t seen any article officially verifying that.
LikeLike
After today’s twitter fight among the players, which made the national news, Strong will have a difficult time seeing the end of the season as the Texas coach. Could even appoint an assistant as interim coach to sooth the player. Pretty much a freshmen against the upper class men tiff based on losing and playing time jealousy
LikeLike
0 & 1 loss teams after 5 weeks and who picked up 2nd loss
________________________________________________
ACC / P5 / 14 teams
(2) | 4-0 Clemson and Florida State
(6) | 4-1 NC State, Duke, and North Carolina + 3-1 Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Miami
(x) | Boston College picked up 2nd loss
B12 / P5 / 10 teams
(4) | 5-0 Oklahoma State and TCU + 4-0 Oklahoma and Baylor
(2) | 3-1 Kansas State and West Virginia
(x) | Texas Tech picked up 2nd loss
B1G / P5 / 14 teams
(4) | 5-0 Michigan State, Ohio State, Iowa, and Northwestern
(4) | 4-1 Indiana, Penn State, Michigan, and Illinois
(x) | Minnesota and Wisconsin picked up 2nd loss
PAC / P5 / 12 teams
(2) | 5-0 California + 4-0 Utah
(3) | 4-1 Stanford and UCLA + 3-1 Southern Cal
(x) | Arizona, Colorado, and Washington State picked up 2nd loss
SEC / P5 / 14 teams
(3) | 5-0 Florida and Texas A&M + 4-0 LSU
(5) | 3-1 Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, Alabama, and Mississippi
(x) | Mississippi State picked up 2nd loss
IND / ?? / 3 teams
(1) | 4-1 Notre Dame
————————————————
AAC / G5 / 12 teams
(4) | 5-0 Memphis + 4-0 Temple, Navy, and Houston
(x) | Tulsa picked up 2nd loss
CUSA / G5 / 13 teams
(2) | 4-1 Western Kentucky and Marshall
MAC / G5 / 13 teams
(1) | 4-0 Toledo
(1) | 4-1 Ohio
MWC / G5 / 12 teams
(2) | 4-1 Boise State
(x) | Air Force picked up 2nd loss
SUN / G5 / 11 teams
(2) | 4-1 Georgia Southern + 3-1 Appalachian State
LikeLike
Undefeated teams in action in week 6 (all games listed in EST)
Thursday, October 8
—————————-
8 pm / ESPN2 / SMU (1-4, 0-1) @ Houston (4-0, 1-0)
Saturday, October 10
—————————-
B1G
12 pm / BTN / Maryland (2-3, 0-1) @ Ohio State (5-0, 1-0)
12 pm / ESPNU / Illinois (4-1, 1-0) @ Iowa (5-0, 1-0)
3:30 pm / BTN / Northwestern (5-0, 1-0) @ Michigan (4-1, 1-0)
8 pm / BTN / Michigan State (5-0, 1-0) @ Rutgers (2-2, 0-1)
ACC
3:30 pm / ABC or ESPN2 / Georgia Tech (2-3, 0-2) @ Clemson (4-0, 1-0)
8 pm / ABC / Miami (3-1, 0-0) @ Florida State (4-0, 2-0)
B12
12 pm / FOXS1 / Baylor (4-0, 1-0) @ Kansas (0-4, 0-1)
12 pm / ABC / Oklahoma (4-0, 1-0) vs Texas (1-4, 0-1)
7 pm / ESPN2 / Oklahoma State (5-0, 2-0) @ West Virginia (3-1, 0-1)
7:30 pm / FOX / TCU (5-0, 2-0) @ Kansas State (3-1, 0-1)
PAC
10 pm / ESPN / California (5-0, 2-0) @ Utah (4-0, 1-0)
SEC
12 pm / ESPN / LSU (4-0, 2-0) @ South Carolina (2-3, 0-3)
7:30 pm / SECN / Florida (5-0, 3-0) @ Missouri (4-1, 1-1)
OTR
12 pm / ESPNN / Tulane (2-2, 1-0) @ Temple (4-0, 1-0)
3 pm / ESPN3 / Kent State (2-3, 1-0) @ Toledo (4-0, 1-0)
3:30 pm / NBC / Navy (4-0, 1-0) @ Notre Dame (4-1, 3-0)
LikeLike
Northwestern at Michigan looks to be the best of these games next week. Cal and oSu will be tested. With close escapes against Texas these schools look like pretenders vs. contenders.
Texas got pounded this yesterday by TCU, and will get pounded next week by Oklahoma. Now that AD Patterson is gone can Charlie Strong be far behind? The last time Texas lost to TCU two years in a row (1956) they fired their coach. Texas will beat Kansas at home (last KS B12 road win was in 2008) and should be competitive against KSU/TT in Austin and ISU on the road. So probably 4-8 at best after 6-7 last year. On a $ per win basis Charlie easily beats out Saban and Meyer. I doubt he will be replaced mid-year since Texas has a temp AD now.
LikeLike
And the problems at Louisville probably have doomed Tom Jurich’s chances of becoming the new UT AD.
If Strong is disnissed, 1) who replaces him, and 2) where does he wind up?
1) I could see some wealthy Texas exes pursuing Saban again, though I don’t see it happening. D’Antonio is another possibility, although it could wind up as another Bielema to Arkansas situation and that might dissuade him from leaving East Lansing.
2) Some at Maryland think he would be a fine successor to Edsall, and Kevin Plank certainly has the money. Other programs interested in buying low might also be in the picture.
LikeLike
“Cal will be tested?” What planet are you on? Utah will crush Cal.
LikeLike
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches poll:
1. OSU
2. TCU
3. MSU
4. Baylor
5. LSU
6. Clemson
7. Utah
8. FSU
9. OU
10. AL
13. MS
14. NW
15. ND
16. UGA
20. UCLA
21. MI
23. IA
24. Boise
25. Memphis
SEC – 6/14 = 43%
P12 – 5/12 = 42%
B12 – 4/10 = 40%
B10 – 5/14 = 36%
ACC – 2/14 = 14%
Other – 3
Good balance nationally.
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
AP:
1. OSU
2. TCU
3. Baylor
4. MSU
5. Utah
6. Clemson
7. LSU
8. AL
9. TAMU
10. OU
LikeLike
Coaches’ poll is out.
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
SEC (6) #5 LSU, #10 Bama, #11 A&M, #12 Florida, #13 Ole Miss & #16 UGA
B1G (5) #1 Ohio St, #3 Mich St, #14 N’west, #21 Michigan & #23 Iowa
B-12 (4) #2 TCU, #4 Baylor, #9 Oklahoma! & #19 OK State
P-12 (5) #7 Utah, #17 USC, #18 Stanford, #20 UCLA & #22 Cal
ACC (2) #6 Clemson & #8 Florida St
Ind #15 ND
MWC #24 Boise St
AAC #25 Memphis
LikeLike
The LSU/South Carolina game will be moved from Columbia to Baton Rouge this weekend due to conditions in Columbia.
http://www.lsusports.net/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=5200&ATCLID=210401612
I’ll be in South Carolina anyway, as its Parents weekend at The Citadel and I haven’t seen my son in two months. We were planning on driving up to Columbia for the game though.
Ten years ago, LSU faced a similar situation and had to move a home game with Arizona State to Tempe at the last minute. I went to that game and the Arizona State fans were great. I’m sure my fellow Tiger fans will pay it forward with South Carolina.
LikeLike
Is there talk of LSU giving some of the gate to SC since home games are a large part of funding an AD?
LikeLike
After expenses, South Carolina gets everything.
LikeLike
LSU is hoping to break even. South Carolina will get the ticket revenue. LSU will get concessions to pay for expenses. After expenses are paid, LSU expects to make a contribution to the Red Cross for relief in Columbia.
LikeLike
I assumed something was in the works but I hadn’t heard anything.
LSU is so much better than SC this season that the location shouldn’t influence the outcome.
LikeLike
Well if they were playing in a real swamp like Columbia is now, it could even things out.
And home field always makes some difference.
LikeLike
From Columbia’s (SC) newspaper regarding the welcome South Carolina will receive in Baton Rouge.
http://www.thestate.com/sports/college/university-of-south-carolina/usc-football/article38295864.html
Also, game time was moved from 11a CDT to 2:30p. ESPN is televising. Seven different game times had to be shuffled around to accommodate a later kickoff in order to maximize the gate for South Carolina. CBS had to agree to let this game go against its feature SEC game. LSU/USCe (with Heisman trophy winner to be Leonard Fournette) will probably outdraw the CBS Georgia Tennessee game.
And LSU will be wearing purple jerseys in an SEC game for the first time in almost 20 years.
LikeLike
Purple in a home SEC game, that is. Miss State and perhaps other conference schools have worn white at home when hosting LSU to force the Tigers to “go dark.”
LikeLike
I haven’t seen this posted, an Ad Age article on Rutgers/Maryland and the BTN.
http://adage.com/article/media/east-young-man-expansion-a-boon-big-ten-network/300748/
LikeLike
Nice find. Some tidbits from the article:
* According to SNL Kagan data, cable operators pay an estimated “in-market” rate of $1 per sub per month, more than double the $0.44 fees charged outside the conference’s home markets.
* Cablevision alone serves 2.64 million video customers in New York, New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut; with the upgraded fee in place, BTN sees its annual payout from the operator rise to around $31.7 million from $13.9 million.
* At present, buyers say the average unit cost of a 30-second spot in one of BTN’s live football telecasts is on par with the rates charged by the nation’s No. 1 conference-affiliated channel, the ESPN-owned-and-operated SEC Network. That said, there is plenty of room for improvement; in September, the average cost of in-game :30 on both networks was south of $4,000 a pop.
* More than 1.5 million alumni from Big Ten member schools call the East coast corridor (NYC – DC) home
* Since Rutgers and Maryland jumped to the Big Ten, BTN’s sub count has risen to some 60 million households, up 15% from the 52 million customers it reached at the end of the 2013-14 academic year.
* “We’re looking west of Nebraska to make sure people can see the kind of games we can offer,” said Mr. Silverman, who notes that BTN is carried on Time Warner Cable in Los Angeles. “But we are very happy with our distribution. We think the Big Ten is the one true national conference. Our alums are everywhere. The SEC is just a regional conference in terms of its alums and where they live. We truly have a platform and a fan base that will allow us to be the leading collegiate sports network.”
* Rutgers and Maryland won’t be eligible for a slice of the TV pie until both have put in six years at the Big Ten.
LikeLike
Thanks, Greg. The article mentions the increase of nearly $18 million dollars per year, from Time Warner in NY, NJ and SW Ct. I believe that Time Warner is the biggest cable player in New York City. In NJ the big player is Comcast with Verizon Fios (probably) in second. One can infer (or at least guess) that Rutgers logically should have brought in at least that much revenue from the millions of Comcast subscribers in NJ None of these numbers include increased advertising revenues.
That might explain why there are no B1G second thoughts about the most recent incredible stupidity at old RU. Adding at least $40 million per year in new revenues in year one buys a lot of understanding.
In any season where RU miraculously has a good team, the B1G will totally own the New York metro area, as well as NJ. That is 25 million people.
In 2019, RU will have played 150 years of college football and still cannot get it right.
LikeLike
Until the mid-1970s, Rutgers was an ersatz Ivy where football was concerned, playing Lafayette and Lehigh as well as Princeton and a few other Ivies. Compare that to Maryland’s 61 years in the big-time (if not always football-potent) ACC before joining the Big Ten. This conference move is a major culture change on the banks of the Raritan, not merely for football but for nearly all Scarlet Knights sports.
LikeLike
Rough week for Texas. Now Bevo’s sick. Mascot since 2004 has “life-threatening” condition and won’t make OU game.
http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2015-10-07/bevo-xiv-update-texas-mascot-longhorn-steer-oklahoma-life-threatening-condition-ncaa-football
LikeLike
The perfect metaphor for Texas’ season. I for one am praying for miraculous recovery for Bevo and the team.
LikeLike
I trust Bevo now feels a bit better, as do all of those who wear burnt orange.
The Longhorns’ upset perhaps no ensures that the winner of the Texas Christian-Baylor game will win the Big 12, particularly after the Horned Frogs stormed back to win at K-State last night. (Could Doug Meacham be one of the candidates to succeed Randy Edsall in 2016? Not sure if he’d be interested — he’s an Okie State alum born in Arlington, Texas, and he’s 50, perhaps not quite the young guy for the long haul — but you never know.)
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/13845985/under-armour-signs-10-year-96m-deal-wisconsin-badgers
The University of Wisconsin agreed to a 10-year deal with Under Armour on Friday worth a total of $96 million in cash and the retail value of products received.
The deal will begin on July 1, 2016, after Wisconsin’s 15-year relationship with Adidas comes to an end.
LikeLike
Are they required to wear hideous uniforms? They made Maryland and Texas Tech make themselves look ridiculous.
LikeLike
Only Maryland’s cheer leaders are wearing the hideous uniforms today. The ones on the athletes look pretty good. They’re giving Ohio State a very hard time, too. tOSU might not be number one tomorrow.
LikeLike
It turned out somewhat like the Michigan game — a valiant effort for slightly more than one half before a lack of depth did the Terps in — with the only difference being this time, the offense showed up.
Maryland is heading into an open week, meaning Edsall’s expected dismissal could come today or tomorrow to give the interim guy (Locksley, most likely) time to prepare for Penn State on Oct. 24. (That game will be played in Baltimore, replacing a previous agreement the Terps had to host Virginia Tech there back in ACC days. While a 2018 game vs. Texas is already committed to FedEx, expect all future Big Ten home games to be played at College Park.)
But things won’t be quiet on campus next Saturday with Maryland Madness scheduled, as Mark and Brenda unveil their Top 5 programs to the public.
LikeLike
Well that should buy Charlie Strong some time, and walk Bullet back from the edge. 🙂
Greg’s chest beginning to puff up a bit?
LikeLike
The way things look the B1G Title Game might be Rudock’s Revenge.
LikeLike
“Greg’s chest beginning to puff up a bit?”
I’m just enjoying the ride. 🙂
LikeLike
Yes, Charlie Strong will now coach Texas in 2016; however, that should not be a relief for Texas fans. How did Michigan giving RichRod 3 years turn out? Harbaugh has shown that with the talent that schools like Michigan and Texas get a good coach should come in and win immediately. It is not just Strong’s W-L record. The large number of penalties Texas gets and special teams play are indications of poor coaching. It will be better for the new AD since he will be on the job for half a year before he has to review Strong’s performance.
As far as Maryland’s situation, I think a lot of boosters thought he would be out of there last year. Getting rid if him now will not improve the 2015 record, but will quiet the boosters.
North Texas had no rumors, but after losing to a FCS team by 59 points for a 0-5 record this year the coach was gone within the hour. The person that scheduled Portland State should have been fired (maybe that was the coach). Texas has lots of lousy FCS teams they could have played.
LikeLike
There aren’t many Harbaugh’s around, and I’m going to wager that Texas won’t get any of Harbaugh/Meyer/Saban if they get rid of Strong. If Longhorns fans get rid of any coach who doesn’t meet that standard after 2-3 years, I’m afraid that you folks will stay perpetually disappointed.
LikeLike
The North Texas AD should be fired for the way he handled it, calling him out of a team meeting.
LikeLike
0 & 1 loss teams after 6 weeks and who picked up 2nd loss
________________________________________________
ACC / 14 teams / 5 teams remain
(2) | 5-0 Clemson and Florida State
(3) | 5-1 Duke + 4-1 North Carolina and Pittsburgh
(x) | Syracuse, NC State, and Miami picked up 2nd loss
B12 / 10 teams / 4 teams remain
(3) | 6-0 Oklahoma State and TCU + 5-0 Baylor
(1) | 4-1 Oklahoma
(x) | Kansas State and West Virginia picked up 2nd loss
B1G / 14 teams / 6 teams remain
(3) | 6-0 Michigan State, Ohio State, and Iowa
(3) | 5-1 Northwestern, Penn State, and Michigan
(x) | Indiana and Illinois picked up 2nd loss
PAC / 12 teams / 4 teams remain
(1) | 5-0 Utah
(3) | 5-1 California + 4-1 Stanford and UCLA
(x) | Southern Cal picked up 2nd loss
SEC / 14 teams / 6 teams remain
(3) | 6-0 Florida + 5-0 Texas A&M and LSU
(3) | 5-1 Alabama and Mississippi + 4-1 Kentucky
(x) | Georgia and Missouri picked up 2nd loss
IND / 3 teams / 1 team remain
(1) | 5-1 Notre Dame
————————————————
AAC / 12 teams / 4 teams remain
(3) | 5-0 Temple, Memphis, and Houston
(1) | 4-1 Navy
(x) | none this week
CUSA / 13 teams / 2 teams remain
(2) | 5-1 Western Kentucky and Marshall
(x) | none this week
MAC / 13 teams / 2 teams remain
(1) | 5-0 Toledo
(1) | 5-1 Ohio
(x) | none this week
MWC / 12 teams / 1 team remain
(1) | 5-1 Boise State
(x) | none this week
SUN / 11 teams / 2 teams remain
(2) | 4-1 Georgia Southern and Appalachian State
(x) | none this week
LikeLike
Undefeated teams in action in week 7 (all games listed in EST)
Friday, October 16
—————————-
9 pm / ESPNU / Houston (5-0, 2-0) @ Tulane (2-3, 1-1)
Saturday, October 16
—————————-
B1G
12 pm / ABC ESPN2 / Iowa (6-0, 2-0) @ Northwestern (5-1, 1-1)
3:30 pm / ESPN / Michigan State (6-0, 2-0) @ Michigan (5-1, 2-0)
8 pm / ABC / Penn State (5-1, 2-0) @ Ohio State (6-0, 2-0)
ACC
12 pm / ESPN / Louisville (2-3, 1-1) @ Florida State (5-0, 3-0)
7 pm / ESPNU / Boston College (3-3, 0-3) @ Clemson (5-0, 2-0)
B12
12 pm / ? / West Virginia (3-2, 0-2) @ Baylor (5-0, 2-0)
7 pm / ESPN 2 / TCU (6-0, 3-0) @ Iowa State (2-3, 1-1)
PAC
10 pm / ESPN / Arizona State (4-2, 2-1) @ Utah (5-0, 2-0)
SEC
3:30 pm / ? / Alabama (5-1, 2-1) @ Texas A&M (5-0, 2-0)
7 pm / ESPN / Florida (6-0, 4-0) @ LSU (5-0, 3-0)
OTR
12 pm / ESPN3 / Eastern Michigan (1-5, 0-2) @ Toledo (5-0, 2-0)
12 pm / ABC ESPN2 / Mississippi (5-1, 2-1) @ Memphis (5-0, 2-0)
7:30 pm / ? / Central Florida (0-6, 0-2) @ Temple (5-0, 2-0)
————————————————
DNP
Oklahoma State (6-0, 3-0)
LikeLike
It’s official — Edsall is outta here: http://www.diamondbackonline.com/sports/maryland-fires-coach-randy-edsall/article_e1ce426c-6dd8-11e5-834f-ffd372081f46.html
LikeLike
I’m currently a grad student at Georgetown so I’ve followed Maryland football a fair amount the past year. I get that Edsall wasn’t the guy that was going to lead Maryland to new heights but we all knew that last year so why bring him back for another year? And once you’ve committed to bringing him back, why not give him the full season to see how things play out? Aside from the Bowling Green game, the first half of the season went exactly how most people expected. MD was a heavy road underdog to both WVU and OSU, and lost both. Entering the season maybe Michigan was beatable but the way UM is playing now, there’s no shame in a loss (MD was actually far more competitive against UM than NW). Plus, the second half of the schedule is much more manageable with really only two games (at Iowa, at MSU) that would be considered unwinnable.
Again, I’m an outsider so maybe there were other factors at play that may have forced the ADs hand. It will be interesting to see who they go after.
LikeLike
Funding for the new indoor facility, which will be build on the site of venerable Cole Field House, was being jeopardized by Edsall’s presence. I’m sure what’s happened at SC won’t make finding a successor any easier, but comparing a Pacific Coast king to an average East Coast program makes it rather moot.
As of this writing, a Testudo Times poll of (a few dozen) potential candidates has Houston’s Tom Herman with 16%, former Terp QB Frank Reich with 11%, Lane Kiffin and Memphis’ Justin Fuente with 8% and Bo Pelini with 7%. It’s at http://www.testudotimes.com/2015/10/12/9483349/maryland-football-coaching-search-candidates-edsall-replacement
LikeLike
Southern Cal news: Sarkasian is taking a leave of absence, according to KSPN in Los Angeles.
LikeLike
He’s going to rehab for substance abuse issues. Apparently he’s going through a divorce and he already mixed alcohol and medication once this season. People claim he was not himself Sunday at meetings and then he didn’t go to practice.
LikeLike
Leave becomes permanent.
http://espn.go.com/losangeles/college-football/story/_/id/13873288/steve-sarkisian-fired-usc-trojans-head-coach
LikeLike
Re: Sark
It is time – since this is as public as it gets – that we should have a National Campaign that helps recognize, help, and most importantly not put shame on people who have an addiction to drugs or alcohol. Especially alcohol bc it happens to be legal. Let people come out of the closet so to speak…. Most, believe me, want help and scream internally for help. I am not a USC fan but I am a man who believes that if someone needs help then we should try to help. He is exposed – he should be more exposed to bring awareness. Most stories of people who drink too much come months or years after the fact. Not today. We should not make this anonymous anymore. Step up, reach out, help those who need help. They want it, they need it, and they deserve our compassion. I truly feel bad for him.
LikeLike
GEO,
“It is time – since this is as public as it gets – that we should have a National Campaign that helps recognize, help, and most importantly not put shame on people who have an addiction to drugs or alcohol. Especially alcohol bc it happens to be legal.”
I’m happy to recognize it as an illness, but it’s still a self-inflicted one (like lung cancer for a smoker). You knew the substance was potentially addictive when you took it. I have more sympathy for those that get hooked on pain medication due to an illness or injury getting the habit formed.
It’s not shameful to be an addict (although some of their behavior is shameful – that’s how they can hit rock bottom), but they have to want help to get better. Sark went to rehab while denying he had an alcohol problem. That denial is problematic.
Hollywood is full of addicts and people don’t shame them much.
“I am not a USC fan but I am a man who believes that if someone needs help then we should try to help.”
We can try to help him help himself, but he has to do the work. There are some drugs in development that may help treat addiction, though.
That said, USC had to fire him. How could they send an addict into homes to recruit high school kids? No good parents would be fine with a raging alcoholic guiding their children. After he gets treatment and proves he can stay sober for a while, then he can recruit again. But he probably needs to go to the NFL as an assistant for a while.
LikeLike
Obviously you don’t understand addiction. Most addicted drinkers and smokers start when they are in their teen years. But I am certain you are perfect – and probably 26 years old as well.
Millions of people drink and aren’t addicted nor do they show up for work drunk. He needs help and we as a society need to stop shaming people who are addicted. But you go ahead. Your views are light years ahead of anything else I have read on this subject. Thanks for your insight Mr. Perfect. Do you drink? Bc if you do and once you actually become an adult you may be next.
LikeLike
GEO,
“Obviously you don’t understand addiction.”
Right. Because nobody can disagree with you and understand addiction.
“Most addicted drinkers and smokers start when they are in their teen years.”
So? Did I say otherwise? And in this specific case, his drinking didn’t become a problem until his divorce. He’s not a teenager now.
“But I am certain you are perfect”
Thank you.
“and probably 26 years old as well.”
I wish.
“Millions of people drink and aren’t addicted nor do they show up for work drunk.”
And millions of people get divorced without becoming an alcoholic. Sark isn’t one of those millions.
“He needs help”
Yes, he does. Luckily he can afford a great rehab clinic.
“and we as a society need to stop shaming people who are addicted.”
It isn’t shaming to point out their dumb decisions that led to their problem.
“But you go ahead.”
Will do.
“Do you drink?”
Not much. If it became a habit, then I’d start to worry about it.
LikeLike
Say it ain’t so, Steve (Spurrier)! Retired immediately after my Tigers crushed his Gamecocks. Even though he used to run it up on my Tigers in the 90s, I always liked him. Heck, I wanted him be the LSU coach not once but twice. In 87, Spurrier applied and didn’t get called back for a second interview. Again, in 04, I was hoping Spurrier had not signed the South Carolina contract, when Nick Saban gave a Christmas Day announcement that he was leaving LSU for the Dolphins.
Here’s Clay Travis’ ode to the HBC, OBC, or as I always liked to call him . . . Darth Visor.
http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/god-bless-steve-spurrier-101215
LikeLike
Bevo XIV retiring immediately as well. Bovine cancer. Been around since 2004, so saw Vince Young’s great games.
http://www.texassports.com/news/2015/10/13/GEN_1013151344.aspx
LikeLike
The silly season for coaches is getting started early this year. USC, SC, UMD and IL all have openings already. Strong seems safe now but Golden might be out at Miami.
I’m curious to see who USC gets as they are clearly the best job available. There are rumors of SC getting Kirby Smart (so he can go back to replace Saban in a few years).
LikeLike
As Frank tweeted, BTN set records on Saturday for ratings.
The Big Ten Network saw its highest viewership in its history on Saturday, with four of the top-18 football teams in the country playing on the network. For the day (12p-12a), BTN earned a 2.04 HH rating in the network’s 12 metered markets,* and topped its previous record set in November 2014 by 30 percent.
BTN’s games were the highest rated across all cable networks in Baltimore, Chicago, Columbus, Cleveland, Dayton, Detroit and Washington, D.C. and second in Indianapolis, Milwaukee, New York and Philadelphia.**
“The heightened interest in Big Ten football around the country has generated increased enthusiasm for the conference, the schools and BTN,” said BTN President Mark Silverman. “The results from Saturday’s games have exceeded even our most optimistic expectations.”
The noon ET game featuring Maryland at No. 1 Ohio State, a 49-28 Buckeye win, averaged a 2.6 HH rating in the network’s 12 metered markets. The 3:30 p.m. ET matchup between No. 13 Northwestern and No. 18 Michigan resulted in the Wolverines’ third-consecutive shutout and delivered a 2.3 HH rating.
The 8 p.m. ET primetime game showcased No. 4 Michigan State at Rutgers, with the Spartans needing a touchdown in the final minute to secure the victory. Overall, the game earned a 1.7 HH rating.
It was also a record day across BTN’s digital and social media platforms, with all three games registering among the top-10 most viewed events on BTN2Go, the network’s digital extension. BTN’s social platforms saw record-breaking traffic, including 1.5 million video views across BTN.com, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. The Big Ten Network Vine account (@BigTenNetwork) also marked its highest-ever looped Vine, receiving more than 345K loops from Braxton Miller’s highlight move vs. Maryland.
LikeLike
What does an “HH” rating mean? Anyone?
LikeLike
Household.
LikeLike
bullet,
“What does an “HH” rating mean? Anyone?”
As Carl said, HH means household. A HH rating is the percentage of all households with a TV that were tuned to that channel. There are roughly 115M TV households, so a 1.0 would mean 1.15M households were watching.
The other common terms are share, which is the percentage of TVs that were on that were tuned to that channel (useful because it normalizes for the variation in total viewers on different dates and times) and total viewers which is self-explanatory.
LikeLike
“There are roughly 115M TV households”
note, that’s the number for the US as a whole, the BTN is only measuring viewing in big cities across the Big Ten footprint. Still a large number, but not comparable to the national numbers that ESPN, FS1, etc. release.
LikeLike
m (Ag),
“note, that’s the number for the US as a whole, the BTN is only measuring viewing in big cities across the Big Ten footprint.”
Yes, they reported the rating only for the 12 metered markets so the HH rating would only be out of all the households in those 12 markets (and could be extrapolated for the whole footprint). I was giving the generic explanation.
From an older BTN article, here are the 12 markets (they forgot to include their footnotes in the recent piece):
*Source: Nielsen Arianna Overnights (11/22/14). Metered Markets: Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Detroit, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New York, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C.
Click to access 2015-2016-dma-ranks.pdf
Here are the actual numbers of TV households according to Nielsen:
1. New York – 7,368,320
3. Chicago – 3,475,220
4. Philadelphia – 2,917,920
7. DC – 2,443,640
13. Detroit – 1,828,230
15. Minneapolis – 1,723,210
18. Cleveland – 1,493,160
26. Baltimore – 1,099,890
27. Indianapolis – 1,073,090
31. Columbus – 907,530
35. Milwaukee – 882,210
62. Dayton – 462,200
That’s 25,974,620 HH, so about 530,000 HH were watching BTN on average during that day. Each HH is a little over 2 people usually, so call it 1.1M viewers. And that’s just in the metered markets. Factor in the whole footprint and it’s closer to 2M viewers. That’s not a huge number compared to a major channel, but it gives you an idea how it stacks up.
“Still a large number, but not comparable to the national numbers that ESPN, FS1, etc. release.”
Very true. The B10 footprint is only about 30% of the US population. You can extrapolate that 2.04 HH rating to the whole footprint, but you also have to assume almost no viewers elsewhere.
LikeLike
Huh. They don’t meter Pittsburgh or Cincy or Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo/Battle Creek (or St. Louis). All far bigger than Dayton. Harrisburg/Lancaster/York and Wilkes Barre/Scanton are also bigger than Dayton. And Green Bay, Flint, Des Moines, Omaha, and Toledo are almost as big as Dayton.
LikeLike
Richard,
“Huh. They don’t meter Pittsburgh or Cincy or Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo/Battle Creek (or St. Louis). All far bigger than Dayton. Harrisburg/Lancaster/York and Wilkes Barre/Scanton are also bigger than Dayton. And Green Bay, Flint, Des Moines, Omaha, and Toledo are almost as big as Dayton.”
I thought it was odd, too. I started making the list from Nielsen’s DMA list and noted I was well past 12, so I went and found that older article that lists the 12 markets.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/13895102/pac-12-commish-larry-scott-says-consider-containing-college-basketball-season-single-semester
Larry Scott thinks MBB should consider becoming a one-semester sport by pushing back the start date. Jim Delany agrees but sees potential issues with it.
“I think that’s an intriguing concept that we absolutely ought to explore,” Scott said during the conference’s media day event.
He added that he doesn’t want to diminish the mass appeal of March Madness at the conclusion of the season, but he said that a one-semester college basketball season would create advantages for the game and help the sport avoid the “overlap” that unfolds each fall.
He mentioned that “overlap can be a challenge,” with college basketball’s start intersecting with the MLB playoffs, NFL, NBA, NFL and college football.
“As part of that consideration, we have to realize that March Madness is something very unique,” Scott said. “I do love the idea of making college basketball a one-semester sport, a little bit more compact. That all makes sense on a lot of levels. I think the balance of that is what would it do to the way the college basketball season ends?”
Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany also acknowledged preliminary discussions about a new-look college hoops calendar, but he saw potential conflicts with other events and the NCAA’s television partners as a likely obstacle to change.
“Can we move it into a middle of December start time?” Delany asked. “If you pick up a month there, you’re talking about a month on the back end. You’re talking about competition with NBA playoffs. You’re talking about the start of the baseball season. You’re talking about conflicts with [The Masters]. … I don’t think it’s an easy answer at all.”
LikeLike
Related:
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/10/14/ncaa-vp-dan-gavitt-on-moving-the-season-back-one-month-there-are-merits-on-a-lot-of-levels/
LikeLike
If you only care about where college basketball is in relation to college football & pro sports, this is a good idea.
If you care about college sports in general, this is a lousy idea. Backing up basketball on top of baseball, lacrosse, softball, gymnastics, track, etc. is not good for college athletics. Hopefully this won’t pass.
LikeLike
m (Ag),
“If you only care about where college basketball is in relation to college football & pro sports, this is a good idea.
If you care about college sports in general, this is a lousy idea. Backing up basketball on top of baseball, lacrosse, softball, gymnastics, track, etc. is not good for college athletics. Hopefully this won’t pass.”
Football already dominates all the fall sports. Why should the spring sports be protected from hoops? Besides, the regular season ends in early March right now (would shift to early April). The other sports would have time to be out of basketball’s shadow except for the tournament, and that involves relatively few teams after one weekend.
LikeLike
“Why should the spring sports be protected from hoops?”
Because traditionally basketball is a winter sport?
I like three seasons with their traditional sports. FB should end at the new year. BkB all should end in March (preferably early). BsB, track, softball, etc should run through the end of the academic year.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“Because traditionally basketball is a winter sport?”
Not really. It’s a year-round sport. It’s traditionally a winter sport in schools, but that tradition started when season were shorter and most schools were on quarters. Also, a shift in the season would make it a one-semester sport which is something the academics deem greatly preferable (see their resistance to letting any other sport be two-semester).
“I like three seasons with their traditional sports.”
In an ideal world, so do I. But FB and MBB are the moneymakers in general, so they need to be given some preference to maximize the revenue for the AD. Everyone is worried about people not paying attention to MBB until March, and one reason is that the OOC games are overshadowed by FB. Another is the long season with more tournament games.
The 1960 national champs played 28 total games (4 postseason, 14 conference, 10 OOC), starting on 12/1. The regular season ended on 3/5 and the tournament ended on 3/19.
The 2015 champs played 39 total games (8 postseason, 18 conference, 13 OOC), starting on 11/14 (2 exhibition games before that starting on 11/4). The regular season ended on 3/7 and the tournament ended on 4/6. That’s 2.5-4 weeks added to the start and 2 weeks added to the end. Moving the start of the season back to December would be more traditional than leaving it where it is. Eliminating 5-7 games would help, too.
“FB should end at the new year.”
Agreed.
“BkB all should end in March (preferably early).”
Fine by me. Just stop starting it in November.
“BsB, track, softball, etc should run through the end of the academic year.”
It still overlaps a lot since spring semesters tend to end in early May rather than the early to mid-June end of spring quarter.
How about moving some “spring” sports to summer? That’s really when baseball should be played.
LikeLike
I’d rather let academics dictate sports schedules rather than hoary old notions concerning tradition.
“‘Cuz that’s the way it was done when I was a young’un” has always struck me as a very weak argument.
LikeLike
Richard:
That hoary old notion of seasonal sports is born of the academic calendar.
LikeLike
“How about moving some “spring” sports to summer?”
Because most of the students are off during the summer. It is college sports, and college sports in general are most successful in college towns that are depopulated during the summers.
And spring sports have been growing in popularity around the country (baseball in several places; lacrosse in the Big Ten & ACC footprints; softball and women’s gymnastics in the SEC). Indications are that conference networks are boosting this growth. Sabotaging that by throwing basketball against those sports would be a poor decision by college administrators.
LikeLike
m (Ag),
“Because most of the students are off during the summer.”
More are around now than ever before and the diversity of courses offered over summers continues to improve. Besides, very few students attend any of the spring sports anyway. If athletes are all going to be working out all year anyway, it makes sense to spread the seasons over the whole year.
“It is college sports, and college sports in general are most successful in college towns that are depopulated during the summers.”
There is zero evidence that playing over summer would harm anything but student attendance. Since most sports get almost zero attendance and make no money, a drop in attendance is irrelevant. Alumni and adult fans can attend summer games just as easily (if not more easily) as spring games.
“And spring sports have been growing in popularity around the country (baseball in several places; lacrosse in the Big Ten & ACC footprints; softball and women’s gymnastics in the SEC).”
Then moving hoops shouldn’t be a problem since those sports already overlap the tourney.
“Indications are that conference networks are boosting this growth.”
They’ll show whatever is being played in spring and would probably love to have live games to show over summer. Nothing draws ratings like live games.
“Sabotaging that by throwing basketball against those sports would be a poor decision by college administrators.”
Why? Are those other sports going to make them more money than hoops? It’s their duty to try to maximize their revenue streams to reduce AD deficits.
LikeLike
Ccrider:
Not really, and if it was, it was the academic calendar of over a century ago. These days, most American schools are on a semester system.
LikeLike
There has been talk about separating the women’s and men’s college basketball seasons so they don’t run completely concurrently, though the difference wouldn’t be more than a few weeks. WBB is a growing sport, perhaps now #3 on the college sports totem pole, and one certainly more geographically balanced than college baseball, although the relative competitive imbalance for now weakens its appeal. Then again, UCLA’s dominance hampered the growth of MBB until the ’70s, and so should WBB competitively develop once the run of the Evil Empire of Storrs finally comes to an end.
LikeLike
Baseball gets pretty good attendance in a lot of places. Last year LSU averaged 10,880 a game. 33 schools averaged over 2,000 a game. That included 12 members of the SEC and schools as varied as Creighton, Nebraska, Rice and Southern Miss.
Some of the larger track meets get very good attendance.
LikeLike
Hockey gets pretty good attendance some places as well, and they manage to do just fine even while basketball is going on.
LikeLike
bullet,
“Baseball gets pretty good attendance in a lot of places. Last year LSU averaged 10,880 a game. 33 schools averaged over 2,000 a game. That included 12 members of the SEC and schools as varied as Creighton, Nebraska, Rice and Southern Miss.
Some of the larger track meets get very good attendance.”
I specifically mentioned student attendance. Summer is at least as easy as spring for everyone else. How many students are attending these games, and how much would that drop over summer? More importantly, how much are they paying for tickets (since revenue is the key here)? Students will attend whatever games are going on, just like TV will show whichever games are going on. And why shouldn’t summer students get to have games to attend?
LikeLike
I imagine it is mostly students.
Often there is a single athletic fee, so it might not be much of a revenue enhancer. But that’s not the sole factor. And its also a burden on the athletes who can’t get summer jobs or interships.
LikeLike
bullet,
“I imagine it is mostly students.”
That wasn’t my experience at GT but I don’t have any hard data either way.
“Often there is a single athletic fee, so it might not be much of a revenue enhancer. But that’s not the sole factor.”
No, but it is a major factor here because MBB is a revenue sport.
“And its also a burden on the athletes who can’t get summer jobs or interships.”
Many of them can’t do that now anyway because they’re always working out and/or training. Besides, they could shift that to fall like some co-op students do.
LikeLike
If we’re not concerned about student attendance, then move men’s basketball to the summer. It will get high ratings there (only competing with MLB for awhile), allowing the rest of college sports to get more exposure in their traditional places on the calendar.
LikeLike
m (Ag),
“If we’re not concerned about student attendance,”
1. I’m only saying that from a revenue standpoint.
2. Nobody presented any data on student attendance for the non-revenue sports so it’s hard to discuss the impact a calendar shift might have on the numbers.
“then move men’s basketball to the summer. It will get high ratings there (only competing with MLB for awhile), allowing the rest of college sports to get more exposure in their traditional places on the calendar.”
Any TV executive will tell you that summer is the worst season for TV ratings. You don’t move your biggest product there (NCAA tourney funds all the rest of the NCAA activities).
LikeLike
There are fewer viewers in the summer (possibly leading to lower ratings), but there is also much less competition from other sports or the best scripted television (possibly leading to higher ratings). The networks are increasingly programming year round as people have largely stopped watching reruns; regular season college basketball would probably find itself on broadcast TV at least on Fridays & Saturdays nights. This would boost the TV value.
I’m not advocating changing the schedule. But if they think college basketball is purely a TV product that has to get out of the shadow of other sports, move it to the summer.
LikeLike
Unlike baseball, a shift to summer for basketball might incur significant extra expense as the arenas have to be cooled at great expense (people help provide the heat during winter).
Also, baseball would work better nationally in the summer versus the current schedule which clearly disadvantages the northern schools.
LikeLike
There’s been a lot of legal wrangling over daily fantasy sports (FanDuel, DraftKings, etc) and gambling lately.
http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/13897401/daily-fantasy-outlawed-nevada-gaming-control-board-being-unlicensed-gambling
An important decision just came from NV as the Gaming Control Board just outlawed unlicensed DFS in NV. The operators could apply for gaming licenses but must cease and desist for now. The casinos do host fantasy sports.
DFS is already illegal in 5 states and more are looking into it. This decision by NV may sway other states since NV is more experienced dealing with gambling.
http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/13897169/nfl-looking-prevent-congressional-hearing-ties-daily-fantasy-sports
Meanwhile, the NFL is trying to stop congress from looking into the NFL’s ties to fantasy sports and avoid a hearing on DFS in general.
http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/13878338/federal-trade-commission-asked-investigate-daily-fantasy-operators
In addition, the DOJ, FBI, FTC and multiple state agencies all have been asked to look into various aspects of DFS.
http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/13884984/federal-appeals-court-grants-new-jersey-rehearing-sports-betting-case
Also, a federal appeals court granted NJ a rehearing on their fight to legalize sports betting in NJ.
Meanwhile, ESPN is ratcheting up their gambling coverage
LikeLike
I wouldn’t unregulated DFS. Read somewhere 90% of the winnings are won by less than 2% of the players. I’d have far better odds at any game in any Vegas establishment (even the back ally ones).
LikeLike
I wouldn’t touch…
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25342331/conference-usa-to-name-judy-macleod-as-first-female-fbs-commissioner
CUSA is about to officially break the I-A commissioner gender barrier by making their interim commish the permanent one.
LikeLike
Wow, it looks like MI caught NE’s terrible luck.
MI had 4th and 2 at MSU’s 47 with 10 seconds left. Punting was probably the right call but the risks of a big return, block or bad snap are high enough to make it a risky call. Hopefully the punter gets over it and doesn’t catch too much flak online.
LikeLike
Weirdest ending to a CFB game since Alabama at Auburn in 2013. MSU’s only lead of the game came at the final gun.
LikeLike
Nebraska is done with it. Michigan can keep it.
LikeLike
0 & 1 loss teams after 7 weeks and who picked up 2nd loss
________________________________________________
ACC 35.71% / 14 teams / 5 teams remain
(2) | 6-0 Clemson and Florida State
(3) | 5-1 Duke, North Carolina and Pittsburgh
(x) | none this week
B12 40.00% / 10 teams / 4 teams remain
(3) | 7-0 TCU + 6-0 Oklahoma State and Baylor
(1) | 5-1 Oklahoma
(x) | none this week
B1G 21.43 / 14 teams / 3 teams remain
(3) | 7-0 Michigan State, Ohio State, and Iowa
(0) | none this week
(x) | Northwestern, Penn State, and Michigan picked up 2nd loss
PAC 25.00% / 12 teams / 3 teams remain
(1) | 6-0 Utah
(2) | 5-1 California and Stanford
(x) | UCLA picked up 2nd loss
SEC 28.57%/ 14 teams / 4 teams remain
(1) | 6-0 LSU
(3) | 6-1 Alabama and Florida + 5-1 Texas A&M
(x) | Mississippi and Kentucky picked up 2nd loss
IND 33.33% / 3 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 6-1 Notre Dame
————————————————
AAC 33.33% / 12 teams / 4 teams remain
(3) | 6-0 Temple, Memphis, and Houston
(1) | 4-1 Navy
(x) | none this week
CUSA 15.38 / 13 teams / 2 teams remain
(2) | 6-1 Western Kentucky and Marshall
(x) | none this week
MAC 7.69% / 13 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 6-0 Toledo
(0) | none this week
(x) | Ohio picked up 2nd loss
MWC 0.00% / 12 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 7
(0) | none this week
(x) | Boise State picked up 2nd loss
SUN 18.18% / 11 teams / 2 teams remain
(2) | 5-1 Georgia Southern and Appalachian State
(x) | none this week
LikeLike
Undefeated teams in action in week 8 (all games listed in EST)
Thursday, October 22
—————————-
AAC vs AAC
7 pm / ESPN2 / 22 Temple (6-0, 3-0) @ East Carolina (4-3, 2-1)
Friday, October 23
—————————-
AAC vs AAC
8 pm / ESPN / 18 Memphis (6-0, 2-0) @ Tulsa (3-3, 0-2)
Saturday, October 16
—————————-
B1G vs B1G
3:30 pm / ABC ESPN2 / Indiana (4-3, 0-3) @ 7 Michigan State (7-0, 3-0)
8 pm / ABC / 1 Ohio State (7-0, 3-0) @ Rutgers (3-3, 1-2)
ACC vs ACC
12 pm / ABC / 6 Clemson (6-0, 3-0) @ Miami (4-2, 1-1)
7 pm / ESPN2 / 9 Florida State (6-0, 4-0) @ Georgia Tech (2-5, 0-4)
B12 vs B12
12 pm / ESPN / Iowa State (2-4, 1-2) @ 2 Baylor (6-0, 3-0)
3:30 pm / FOXS1 / Kansas (0-6, 0-3) @ 14 Oklahoma State (6-0, 3-0)
PAC vs PAC
7:30 pm / FOX / 3 Utah (6-0, 3-0) @ Southern California (3-3, 1-2)
SEC vs CUSA
7 pm / ESPNU / Western Kentucky (6-1, 3-1) @ 5 LSU (6-0, 4-0)
AAC vs AAC
12 pm / ESPNN / 21 Houston (6-0, 3-0) @ Central Florida (0-7, 0-3)
MAC vs MAC
3 pm / ESPN3 / 19 Toledo (6-0, 3-0) @ Massachusetts (1-5, 0-2)
————————————————
DNP
Iowa (7-0, 3-0)
TCU (7-0, 4-0)
LikeLike
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches poll:
1. OSU
2. Baylor
3. TCU
4. MSU
5. LSU
6. Clemson
7. Utah
8. AL
9. FSU
10. ND
Big movers/B10:
11. Stanford +5
13. IA +4
16. TAMU -6
17. MI -3
17. Memphis +5
20. Toledo +5
23. MS -11
27. WI
ACC – 3/14 = 21%
B10 – 4/14 = 28%
B12 – 4/10 = 40%
P12 – 3/12 = 25%
SEC – 6/14 = 43%
Other – 5
It’s looking like a fun race for the G5 spot in the NY6 bowls with Memphis, Toledo, Houston and Temple all in the poll.
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
AP poll:
1. OSU
2. Baylor
3. Utah
4. TCU
5. LSU
6. Clemson
7. MSU
8. AL
9. FSU
10. Stanford
Big movers/B10:
12. IA +5
15. TAMU -6
15. MI -3
18. Memphis +9
24. MS -11
ACC – 4/14 = 28%
B10 – 4/14 = 28%
B12 – 4/10 = 40%
P12 – 3/12 = 25%
SEC – 5/14 = 36%
Other – 5
LikeLike
I suppose I should note that the AAC has 3 ranked teams (Memphis, Houston and Temple) for the first time, all undefeated.
AAC – 3/12 = 25%
LikeLike
And all three have coaches mentioned as candidates for current openings, including Maryland, although I’m guessing Herman will be able to get a more lucrative job than College Park and the Temple coach might not be enough of a proven offensive mastermind for Terp fans.
LikeLike
Don’t forget AAC 3/12=25%.
LikeLike
Missed your later comment.
LikeLike
Hasn’t gotten much notice, perhaps because it was a local OU radio guy, but Bowlsby made some interesting comments to him:
Toby Rowland @TRowOU · Oct 12
I asked B12 Commish Bob Bowlsby Saturday on air to predict what the B12 looks like in 5 years. He answered, “without a championship game…
Toby Rowland @TRowOU · Oct 12
“…w/out a network, w/out being at 12 or even larger, we probably if you add all those things up may be at a little bit of a disadvantage.”
LikeLike
The usual suspects:
Dude of WV Big 12 isn’t expanding unless they miss out on the ccg (a little reason from the Dude), but then, his short list is BYU (almost a lock if they expand according to him), Cincinnati, Memphis, UCF, ECU and UConn (he must have gotten this from an ECU “insider”). Says Houston is not being considered.
Minnesota’s dude-greg flugaur likes to troll the WV dude, but he was saying it was between BYU, Houston and UCF. Until last week. Suddenly BYU and UCF were out and Cincinnati is in and 12th is between Houston and Memphis. Houston is definitely a serious candidate. And Big 12 will expand for 2017 season.
MHVer3 has been twitter silent lately, but about a month ago he was mentioning BYU, Houston and Memphis, with Cincinnati, UCF, Boise, SDSU and Colorado St. in the running and Big 12 will likely expand by 2.
LikeLike
Don’t forget the other tinfoil hat, https://twitter.com/gswaim
LikeLike
Swaim usually seems to copy the WV dude. I scanned quickly and saw a comment that BYU was #1-same as the Dude. Houston, Cincinnati and Boise were other candidates. So he differs on Houston who the wv dude swears up and down in not being considered (the UH president has a picture on her twitter giving a UH book to Baylor’s president Ken Starr so they are clearly getting some attention).
Haven’t seen mentioned on here but UH regent Fertitta making comments again, saying better than 50% chance UH ends up in a major conference in the next few years. Based on the polls and the ooc record (almost the same as the ACC), they may already be in one.
LikeLike
Just how many more academically mediocre schools will Kansas and U. Texas tolerate in the B12 before they jump ship?
LikeLike
meant to say “unless they miss out on the playoffs”
LikeLike
Had a weird thought as I was watching BYU conclude its second Friday night home game of this season against an AAC opponent – if nothing comes of the B-12 expansion talk, BYU, Army and one other G5er should join the AAC which then should be split into 3 divisions “headlined” by a service academy: East – Army, South – Navy, West-Air Force.
LikeLike
Or BYU, Air Force, Army, Navy, Tulsa, SMU, Rice and Tulane in one division;
Houston, Memphis, UCF, USF, ECU, Temple, UConn and Cincinnati in the other.
That might be a lineup that could attract BYU, Army and Air Force.
LikeLike
The private division could just morph into its own league if it is decidely not about player compensation – Wake Forest and Vandy just said hmmm…..
LikeLike
There’s been enough talk by presidents and the commissioner, I’m beginning to think the Big 12 will try to become mathematically accurate, leaving the Big 10 and Atlantic 10 in the silly names category (maybe the Horizon and Summit as well, but they aren’t mathematically silly). Big 10 could be alone if the Big East decides to help the A10 correct itself by a raid.
There is a tactical question. Do they expand before the Big 10 renewal in case Fox and ESPN bust the bank and are reluctant to pay much for a Big 12 ccg? Or do they wait as the networks may be holding time slots and dollars in reserve in order to bid on the Big 10 and the “loser” will be anxious to get that Big 12 ccg?
LikeLike
“…to think the Big 12 will try to become mathematically accurate…”
By expanding (your post of Bowlsby’s Coments not withstanding)? I think “Big 10” is a non starter.
LikeLike
As long as UT is in the Big 12, Bowlsby will dance to Austin swing.
LikeLike
Auditioning for the AD job?
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/13927159/former-louisville-cardinals-basketball-players-recruits-acknowledge-stripper-parties-minardi-hall
Things are getting pretty ugly at UL. Will Pitino survive again or is this the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back?
LikeLike
Knocks out Jurich out of the AD sweepstakes (UT, USC if Haden takes doctors advice) as well. Damned either way – if he “takes out Pitino” a lot of coaches are not going to bother interviewing.
LikeLike
Heard they are renaming the playing surface the “S-court”.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13930709/rich-rodriguez-arizona-wildcats-rips-scheduling-pac-12-conference
P12 coaches aren’t happy with the schedules they’ve been getting all filled with night games. It’s the price the P12 chose to pay to get a bigger TV deal, but now coaches are bringing up player welfare.
Arizona coach Rich Rodriguez unloaded on the Pac-12 Monday, accusing the league of not caring about student-athlete welfare because of continued late kickoff times.
The Wildcats, who play 12 straight games without a bye week, have had a 5 p.m. or later kickoff in five of their seven games so far this season. The news that their Oct. 31 game at Washington is an 8 p.m. kickoff, followed by a road trip to USC the following weekend, is what set off Rodriguez during his news conference.
“I just found out that the game at Washington is at night, so we will get back at 5 in the morning,” Rodriguez said. “I just don’t understand how this happens when you play 12 straight games, then you play night road games and then we are going to play an 8 p.m. road game at Washington, get back at 5 in the morning and then have to go back on the road again. If the conference is really concerned about student-athlete welfare, I think someone should step in, because when do guys get a chance to get healthy? They are not getting treatments on the plane. They can try to sleep, but they are not getting a whole lot of rest when they are traveling. It is just ridiculous in my opinion.”
I know coaches are notorious whiners about schedules, but all night games is a fan issue too.
One small suggestion for RichRod, though – make the school pay for hotel rooms after the game instead of flying straight home. At least that way the players can sleep.
Rodriguez is the second Pac-12 coach in the last couple of weeks to show displeasure at the league’s scheduling. Earlier this month, UCLA coach Jim Mora was frustrated that the Bruins had to play back-to-back Thursday night games, saying, “It’s unbelievable that we’re calling these kids student-athletes, and yet we’re going to force them to miss six days of school so they can play two football games in a row on Thursday nights.”
Why on earth do players need to miss 3 days of classes for a Thursday night game? They can’t travel on Wednesday night or Thursday morning?
LikeLike
Depends on where they go and how cheap the athletic department is. If they take the bus from UCLA to Stanford, that’s 5:30 on the bus. Probably a half-hour to load everything and an hour to unload everything and get everything in to the hotel. 1 hour break to eat. If they want to have a (late) 8PM dinner, they’d have to leave by noon (or 1PM at latest). So any afternoon classes on Wednesday would be shot.
LikeLike
One small suggestion for RichRod, though – make the school pay for hotel rooms after the game instead of flying straight home. At least that way the players can sleep.
Really! ASU-get a room!
LikeLike
With the NFL taking over Thursday nights, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the P5 give up on TH night non-holiday games in their next contract round. Ratings are much higher the one or two weeks when there isn’t NFL competition. Those games can’t be worth as much as ESPN and Fox anticipated when they did the deals.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13926103/crucial-games-litter-second-half-college-football-season
We’ve got an exciting November coming up.
ESPN lists 10 of the most important games remaining in chronological order:
11/7
FSU @ Clemson – winner is likely the ACC champ (the Coastal is horrible), loser is out
LSU @ AL – winner is likely the SEC W champ and probably the SEC champ
11/21
MSU @ OSU – MSU has to win to stay alive, first major challenge for OSU
Cal @ Stanford – winner likely wins the P12N (if Cal stays strong until then)
Memphis @ Temple – the AAC has 3 undefeated teams right now
11/27
Baylor @ TCU
11/28
OU @ OkSU
OSU @ MI
ND @ Stanford
FSU @ UF
Obviously the CCGs are big, too. Also, all the other games between the top 4 in the B12 are in November (none are on CCG Saturday).
LikeLike
And then there’s this nugget, say OSU beats MSU while MI beats OSU and all three win out otherwise. The result is a 3-way tie for 1st in the East at 7-1 with all 3 being 1-1 head to head. Going through the tiebreakers, #1-4 wouldn’t decide anything so you get to #5.
The highest ranked team in the first College Football Playoff poll following the completion of Big Ten regular season conference play shall be the representative in the Big Ten Championship Game, unless the two highest ranked tied teams are ranked within one spot of each other in the College Football Playoff poll. In this case, the head-to-head results of the top two ranked tied teams shall determine the representative in the Big Ten Championship Game.
The problem is that the final CFP poll doesn’t come out until Tuesday night at 7pm. That means 3 days of all 3 teams having to prepare both possible opponents. Granted they know each other pretty well, but you really want more than 3 days to put in a gameplan. It could make for an ugly game just when the winner might need the style points to make the CFP.
In case you wondered, the #6 tiebreaker is overall record which would eliminate MI and OSU would get in over MSU due to the head to head result. I assume this tiebreaker exists in case nobody is ranked in the CFP poll, but if they all have that many losses I’m not sure if it’s possible to get through the first 4 tiebreakers.
As a reminder, here are the first 4:
* The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other.
* The records of the three tied teams will be compared within their division.
* The records of the three teams will be compared against the next highest placed teams in their division in order of finish (4, 5, 6, and 7).
* The records of the three teams will be compared against all common conference opponents.
LikeLike
??? OSU/MSU/UMich won’t have to play each other again.
They’d have to play the West winner, which will very likely be known after that Saturday. Sure, 3 teams would have to prepare for the West winner while 2 will be disappointed, but the East winner doesn’t actually suffer a disadvantage.
The West winner does, but in any case, sloppiness tends to come from poor fundamentals (poor tackling and turnovers), not lack of turnovers. And do you really think the West champ has a chance at the playoffs? I mean, Iowa may have a case if they run thr table and win the CCG, but how likely do you consider that to be?
LikeLike
Richard,
“??? OSU/MSU/UMich won’t have to play each other again.”
Yes, sorry, I edited that into a mess.
As you said, the West champ would have to prepare for all 3 and all 3 East teams would have to prepare for the West champ. That’s wasted effort by 2 of the 3 in the East and an unfair disadvantage for the West champ.
“And do you really think the West champ has a chance at the playoffs? I mean, Iowa may have a case if they run thr table and win the CCG, but how likely do you consider that to be?”
I don’t consider it likely but it’d be unfair not to count them as a contender right now. They have a fairly easy schedule to finish out the regular season (UMD, @IN, MN, PU @NE) unless one of those teams starts playing a lot better (currently a combined 3-14 in B10 play). And any given team can win a CCG, especially if the East winner is beaten up and/or emotionally drained.
LikeLike
If they get to tie-breaker #5, I suspect there will be a lot of people in the Big Ten saying, “What on earth were we thinking, when we came up with that?”
LikeLike
ESPN preparing for layoffs
http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/20/media/espn-layoffs/index.html
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/13939337/ncaa-sends-letter-draftkings-fanduel-prohibiting-ads-championship-events
The NCAA cancelled a scheduled meeting with FanDuel and DraftKings executives and instead banned DFS advertising from all championship events. They also asked that they stop offering DFS for college sports.
LikeLike
Wilner tweeting about PAC12 options
LikeLike
LikeLike
If I was running a company, I would not hire the Pac presidents as a board.
First, they allowed themselves to get the worst TV deal of the P5 conferences.
Then, desperate for TV revenue, they gave Scott the mandate of maximizing their next TV contract, which led to all those Thursday and late Saturday games that impact student-athlete welfare adversely.
Then they took the risk of doing their conference network themselves with no partner, which led weaker distribution of the PTN and the total 12 schools of the Pac taking in money from the PTN that is roughly equal to what one full-share member of the B10 gets from the BTN.
Then, fat, happy, and content from their new TV deal, they reject a football powerhouse and elite brand in OU, which may hamstring them in the future.
And finally, they are the only league (who wasn’t raided) who added additions that did not actually drive up the total value of their tier one TV deal.
LikeLike
Not saying you’re completely wrong, but there are probably factors that they value that you do not.
Universities do not fit neatly in a for profit business model.
Hanson was behind the times. They moved on to Scott.
Highlighting student athlete welfare concerns citing travel/times of competition in a sport that causes more traumatic brain injury than any other team sport is a bit disingenuous.
Their conference network model seems to be what they value. They could sell equity at any time, but they just renewed their commitment to 100% ownership. They see value where you don’t.
IF OU was in fact turned down, and really was looking to leave, why didn’t they landed in any other conference? That criticism could apply to the other P5 conferences.
Their adds did allow a ccg, added inventory, made a conf network more viable, brought two new states with respectable and growing metro areas included, two more than adequate academic institutions, and were coming on board as the largest (at that time) T1 contract was signed.
Not a home run, but a couple solid base hits at a minimum.
LikeLike
One important clarification: the Pac-12 turned down the *pair* of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, which is significantly different than turning down Oklahoma alone. I firmly believe that the Pac-12, Big Ten and SEC would all be very interested in adding Oklahoma *without* Oklahoma State (such as OU being paired with Kansas). Up to this point, Oklahoma has been a package deal with OKST instead of being a true free agent.
LikeLike
Agreed. Point I was making was the Pac didn’t turn down what other P5 conferences found acceptable. The double cross dependency of OU and UT and siblings leaves me still believing that if OU goes anywhere it’s to the PAC in a redo of the 2010 proposal. But I’m not predicting it to happen, only that nobody else is likely able or willing to make the offer to take four to get two that the PAC made before.
LikeLike
I think that when it comes to adding OU, both the SEC and B10 are in stronger positions in terms of potential adds than thr Pac (while the ACC is too far away).
As for disingenuous, not really. It’s not like the Pac has given up playing football, and I don’t see how messing up student-athletes’ studies as well as causing brain damage is somehow better or equal to just causing brain damage.
Or are you saying that the different values that the Pac holds (vs. a purely profit-driven enterprise) includes making student-athlete lives more miserable than a purely profit-driven enterprise would?
LikeLike
Have the B1G and/or SEC decided TT and OkSU are acceptable, and 18 is a good size? Advantage: PAC. They have a card to play the others don’t (this assumes the PAC is willing to make the same offer as 2010), so it would be local politics that would be the deciding factor – can the Kings be separated from their brothers?
They are still only playing one game per week. Weeks are still seven days? Thursday games just cut into thirsty Thursday activities. Crying about night games is probably lost on LSU. How many visitors to Death Valley get to play afternoon games. Playing night in the desert seems a no brainer, from a player and fan standpoint. All these possibilities were known at the signing of the T1 contract, which has enabled expanded health, training, nutrition, educational resources to be developed.
Don’t get me wrong. I’d prefer most games on sat afternoon, but what would T1 contract be worth?. The trade off seems fair, although scheduling could be improved perhaps by having ESPN/fox make selections much earlier.
LikeLike
If I was running a company, I would not hire the Pac presidents as a board.
That’s not really fair. The Pac-12 holds an intrinsically weak position. They have fewer national brands than the other P5 leagues, and a number of mediocre markets where the passion for football is only lukewarm.
But they have the same need to fund their athletic facilities as every other P5 league, so they have to schedule games when television wants to broadcast them.
Then, fat, happy, and content from their new TV deal, they reject a football powerhouse and elite brand in OU, which may hamstring them in the future.
As FTT noted, what they rejected was the combination of OU+OSU, not Oklahoma alone. I’m not sure I would have taken that deal either. Certainly no other P5 league would.
And finally, they are the only league (who wasn’t raided) who added additions that did not actually drive up the total value of their tier one TV deal.
I am pretty sure their deal is worth more than if they had stayed at 10.
LikeLike
You are right that the PAC has an inherently weaker hand than the Big Ten or SEC, but the PAC powers that be have played it played poorly.
Not only did they did they pull the rug out from under Scott with regards to the Oklahoma schools, when they were given the chance to correct some of that damage the next year (with the Big Ten-PAC scheduling alliance) they did the exact same thing.
While the PAC’s position in the conference pecking order has marginally improved compared to where they were in 2010 (they have moved ahead of the ACC) they missed a perfect chance to finish off a rival in the Big XII and significantly expand there appeal east of the Rocky mountains.
Now they are basically stuck in a similar situation to where they were at the start of realignment; well behind the Big Ten and SEC and stuck playing their prime time games after half the country has gone to bed.
LikeLike
You are right that the PAC has an inherently weaker hand than the Big Ten or SEC, but the PAC powers that be have played it played poorly.
Not only did they did they pull the rug out from under Scott with regards to the Oklahoma schools, when they were given the chance to correct some of that damage the next year (with the Big Ten-PAC scheduling alliance) they did the exact same thing.
I have my doubts that the OK/OKSt deal ever would’ve happened, as well as doubts that this was actually a good deal for the parties.
The Big Ten-PAC scheduling alliance would not have helped the PAC’s problems. Most PAC teams are playing a P5 opponent (or its equivalent) in most years. But instead of spreading those games around the country, they would’ve played Big Ten opponents exclusively. Future series like USC-Texas, UCLA-LSU, UCLA-Georgia, Arizona State-Texas Tech, and so on, wouldn’t have existed.
Now they are basically stuck in a similar situation to where they were at the start of realignment; well behind the Big Ten and SEC and stuck playing their prime time games after half the country has gone to bed.
You write as if adding the Oklahoma schools and scheduling Big Ten schools would have obviated the need for prime time games. It wouldn’t.
LikeLike
I have my doubts that the OK/OKSt deal ever would’ve happened, as well as doubts that this was actually a good deal for the parties.
Well there was nothing that was going to stop it except for the presidents/chancellors and they did.
The Big Ten-PAC scheduling alliance would not have helped the PAC’s problems. Most PAC teams are playing a P5 opponent (or its equivalent) in most years.
Colorado and Wazzu are still selling home games because of scheduling problems (and cash issues) which would have stopped with the scheduling alliance.
And consistent exposure in the Midwest would have ensured them the exposure in the Central and East Time Zones the PAC made clear was one its priorities in expansion.
You write as if adding the Oklahoma schools and scheduling Big Ten schools would have obviated the need for prime time games. It wouldn’t.
Except the Oklahoma schools are located in the Central Time zone meaning their prime time games would far more exposure East of the Rockies. That is also true for the Texas and Kansas schools that would have become available after the Big XII collapsed (the Big XII would not have survived without Oklahoma).
LikeLike
“Well there was nothing that was going to stop it except for the presidents/chancellors and they did.”
Or it was never actually happening. After receiving the BoR approval to explore affiliation change, did the schools take the next step? Or, as one rumor said, did the PAC get informed of OU’s intention to leverage that approval in that coming weeks B12 meetings. A middle of the night announcement about staying at 12 seems like giving UT a heads up and assurance of what the PAC was doing.
“(the Big XII would not have survived without Oklahoma).”
UT (and KU BB) could keep it afloat as long as they choose to, as they are doing now.
LikeLike
Not even UT could afford to keep the Big XII afloat for more than a couple years without Oklahoma. The Big XII without Oklahoma would have been a repeat of the SWC after Arkansas left.
LikeLike
I’d also be more inclined to give the PAC presidents the benefit of the doubt that they got some sort of tip off it wasn’t for the fact that they turned around and did the exact same thing the next year with the scheduling alliance with the Big 10.
LikeLike
Frug:
I agree with you in not understanding the failure of the scheduling agreement, but I don’t think it necessarily indicates anything about potential conference membership offers. One is a “hey, let’s get together occasionally,” while the other is a “for better or worse, in sickness and in health, ’til death…etc.”
LikeLike
LikeLike
LikeLike
UCSD has a better shot than those, and they’d need to start a FB team.
LikeLike
Do you think Boise State would consider a football only invite to the American?
If we assume that Memphis, Houston, and Temple continue to be fringe top 25 teams (a big assumption considering all three coaches are hot commodities right now), a future AAC could be a decent league.
It would have the above 3, Boise, and potential fringe top 25 teams in UCF, USF, ECU, and Cincinnati. It wouldn’t have any heavy hitters and it would have a few bottom feeders (SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, UConn, but this hypothetical league would be closer to a power 5 league than a Mountain West or MAC (which are virtually identical per Sagarin) type league. Its champion would be almost guaranteed the group of 5’s NYS bid. Perhaps BYU joins as a football only member as well, further strengthening the league:
EAST
UConn
Temple
Cincinnati
Navy
East Carolina
USF
UCF
WEST
Boise State
BYU
Memphis
Houston
Tulsa
SMU
Tulane
LikeLike
No.
LikeLike
Let’s drink to the Tritons, the bravest of men,
Vive la campagnie
For even their Freshmen can hang at least ten.
Vive la campagnie
Let’s drink to the Tritons so fearless and brave,
Vive la campagnie
At home when they’re reading, or riding the wave.
Vive la campagnie
The Tritons they dwell where the sea meets the sky,
Vive la campagnie
Their spirits not damp, their professors not dry.
Vive la campagnie
Let’s drink to the Tritons, so handsome and brave,
Vive la campagnie
They’ll wave at a figure, or figure a wave.
Vive la campagnie
The Tritons they live in the southland so far,
Vive la campagnie
Where their schooners forever sail over the bar.
Vive la campagnie
Let’s drink to the Tritons, both dead and alive.
Vive la campagnie
They can dive in the drink, or can drink in a dive.
Vive la campagnie
Let’s drink to the Tritons; they learn and they teach,
Vive la campagnie
And every man there is a son of the beach.
Vive la campagnie!
LikeLike
http://www.niuhuskies.com/genrel/102015aac.html
Interesting 17 minute video by NIU Athletics Director. Brett McMurphy re-tweeted a link to it.
Talks about the various schools that have moved up and the impact-TCU, Louisville and Boise St.
Hard data on the value of a successful football program to the whole university.
LikeLike
That basketball (or current lack thereof) though. While it is certainly not driving the decision, thats a potential rude awakening with the schools that would potentially be (still remaining) in the AAC.
LikeLike
Well Frank, Back to the Future missed on this one. Cubs didn’t win the World Series in 2015.
LikeLike
http://www.hammerandrails.com/2015/10/21/9583240/purdue-announces-60-million-upgrade-to-football-facilities
PU announces a $60M football facility upgrade. They had a study done by Populous and some pictures of that report are included in the post. Most interesting is a chart comparing all the various facilities at all 14 B10 schools plus ND tweeted by the original reporter.
LikeLike
The year of parity continues.
#7 Utah got blown out by unranked USC.
#9 FSU outdoes MI’s loss from last week, getting a last second FG tipped and then returned 78 yards for a TD by unranked GT.
#15 TAMU loses to #24 MS.
#20 Cal got blown out by unranked UCLA.
The P12 has only 2 1-loss teams left so their playoff hopes are getting smaller.
The ACC has to hope #6 Clemson beats FSU now. Pitt, UNC and Duke are all also 6-1 but the highest ranked is #23 Duke. A Clemson loss could easily keep the ACC out of the playoff.
Pressure could be coming from ND for one of the 4 spots.
LikeLike
SEC champ, B12 champ, and 2 B10 teams.
Easy-schmeezy.
LikeLike
0 & 1 loss teams after 8 weeks and who picked up 2nd loss
________________________________________________
ACC 35.71% / 14 teams / 5 teams remain
(1) | 7-0 Clemson
(4) | 6-1 Florida State, Duke, North Carolina and Pittsburgh
(x) | none this week
B12 40.00% / 10 teams / 4 teams remain
(3) | 7-0 TCU, Oklahoma State and Baylor
(1) | 6-1 Oklahoma
(x) | none this week
B1G 21.43 / 14 teams / 3 teams remain
(3) | 8-0 Michigan State and Ohio State + 7-0 Iowa
(0) | none this week
(x) | none this week
PAC 16.67% / 12 teams / 2 teams remain
(0) | last undefeated eliminated in Week 8
(2) | 6-1 Utah and Stanford
(x) | California picked up 2nd loss
SEC 21.43% / 14 teams / 3 teams remain
(1) | 7-0 LSU
(2) | 7-1 Alabama + 6-1 Florida
(x) | Texas A&M picked up 2nd loss
IND 33.33% / 3 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 6-1 Notre Dame
————————————————
AAC 33.33% / 12 teams / 4 teams remain
(3) | 7-0 Temple, Memphis, and Houston
(1) | 5-1 Navy
(x) | none this week
CUSA 7.69% / 13 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 7-1 Marshall
(x) | Western Kentucky picked up 2nd loss
MAC 7.69% / 13 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 7-0 Toledo
(0) | none this week
(x) | none this week
MWC 0.00% / 12 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 7
SUN 9.09% / 11 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 6-1 Appalachian State
(x) | Georgia Southern picked up 2nd loss
LikeLike
Time for a CFP preview with the first set of rankings coming out next week.
P5 Contenders (0-1 losses, bold means undefeated):
ACC A – Clemson, FSU (play 11/7)
ACC C – UNC, Duke (play 11/7)
B10 E – OSU, MSU (play 11/21)
B10 W – IA
B12 – Baylor, TCU, OkSU, OU (play all November)
P12 N – Stanford
P12 S – Utah
SEC E – UF
SEC W – LSU, AL (play 11/7)
Other – ND
G5 contenders (0 losses):
AAC E – Temple
AAC W – UH, Memphis (play 11/14)
MAC W – Toledo
LikeLike
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches poll:
1. OSU
2. Baylor
3. TCU
4. LSU
5. MSU
6. Clemson
7. AL
8. Stanford
9. ND
10. OkSU
11. IA
14. Utah -7
15. FSU -6
17. MI
26. TAMU -10
30. Cal – 11
B12 – 4/10 = 40%
SEC – 5/14 = 36%
ACC – 4/14 = 28%
B10 – 4/14 = 28%
P12 – 3/12 = 25%
LikeLike
Sorry:
AAC – 3/12 = 25%
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
AP poll:
1. OSU
2. Baylor
3. Clemson
4. LSU
5. TCU
6. MSU
7. AL
8. Stanford
9. ND
10. IA
13. Utah -10
15. MI
17. FSU – 8
19. MS +5
B12 – 4/10 = 40%
SEC – 5/14 = 36%
ACC – 4/14 = 28%
B10 – 4/14 = 28%
P12 – 3/12 = 25%
AAC – 3/12 = 25%
LikeLike
My condolences to all the families impacted by that car crash at OkSU. It’s amazing that one (probably drunk) driver caused more deaths than the strongest western hemisphere tropical cyclone ever.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/10/26/ole-miss-removes-state-flag-confederate-symbol/74618438/
Ole Miss has pulled down the state flag from campus.
The action came days after the student senate, the faculty senate and other groups adopted a student-led resolution calling for removal of the banner from campus.
“As Mississippi’s flagship university, we have a deep love and respect for our state,” Stocks said in a statement Monday. “Because the flag remains Mississippi’s official banner, this was a hard decision. I understand the flag represents tradition and honor to some. But to others, the flag means that some members of the Ole Miss family are not welcomed or valued.”
The state flag of Mississippi is seen against the front
In removing the flag, the University of Mississippi campus becomes the fourth public university in the state to do so, joining Jackson State University, Mississippi Valley State University and Alcorn State University.
LikeLike
Jerry Kill resigns immediately.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/bigten/2015/10/28/minnesota-coach-jerry-kill-resignation-/74729776/
LikeLike
Definitely not an opening I expected to see this year. So far we already have Illinois, Rutgers,and Minnesota open for next year already. Purdue will almost certainly be open. Rutgers is likely as well and it is not impossible we see Indiana fire their coach (would be a mistake in my opinion though).
LikeLike
Maryland you meant among the certain 3? I agree about Indiana also – better off staying the course.
LikeLike
I also agree that Wilson should be retained at IU. However, his teams fall off a cliff when Sudfeld is not at QB and this is his final season. I think they take a step back next year since Wilson has not shown any ability to develop a backup QB. This is why getting to a bowl this year is critical.
LikeLike
My understanding of the PU situation is that Hazell gets another year due to financial constraints (see the trouble they had raising the $60M). He should be gone but he’ll stick around which isn’t that bad from a PU standpoint. With a lot of jobs already open and most better than PU they wouldn’t have a lot of choices. I think next year there will be some turnover in the SEC and they could get a decent coach from there.
I think Wilson at IU gets two more years for them to realize that he’s the biggest ass in the BigTen outside of their basketball coach.
If Iowa finishes strong which I expect them to win the West even with Canzieri injury I wonder if this gives Captain Kirk an extra year or two which may allow them to line up with Bielema getting run out of Arkansas sometime soon
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25356375/how-pete-carrolls-rugby-style-tackle-is-changing-college-football
CFB is moving towards rugby-style tackling to reduce concussions.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25356705/inside-college-football-if-big-12-wants-in-a-team-better-go-undefeated
The B12 needs an undefeated team in order to make the CFP according to Dennis Dodd. That transitions into some expansion talk.
One source said there would be “pressure” to stage a league championship game if the Big 12 is left out again this year. The Big 12 (and ACC) expect championship game deregulation to be approved at January’s NCAA Convention.
Such a game would be risk/reward. In the 15 years the league staged a conference championship game (1996-2010), the underdog won 40 percent of the time.
Meanwhile, a standing “composition committee” evaluating the worth of expansion updated the league CEOs Monday on its progress. The Big 12 isn’t about to expand (at all), but I can’t think of another league with a composition committee.
This is one is composed of Oklahoma president David Boren, Baylor president Kenneth Starr and West Virginia president Gordon Gee. Boren is in favor of expanding to 12 teams. West Virginia would love a travel partner to keep from jetting almost 1,000 miles to its nearest conference rival. Baylor is in favor of Baylor; the school was scared sick in the last round of realignment it was going to wind up in Conference USA.
“I think there is still going to be instability as long as the Big 12 remains what it is,” Missouri chancellor, R. Bowen Loftin told CBS Sports. “It’s not built around the right geography, or the right alignments.”
Loftin, who oversaw Texas A&M’s transition from the Big 12 to the SEC, added, “Texas, they still believe they can be independent. Maybe they can be. They have all the wealth there.”
Loftin leveled a final blast: “The Big 12 has to figure out a way to become a cohesive conference in order to survive. Otherwise they’re going to wind up with the Larry Scott Division of four, 16-team conferences.”
That’s a reference to the Pac-10’s attempt in 2010 to grab six teams from the Big 12 to form a 16-team Pac-12.
That attempt failed. Back then.
LikeLike
Loftin is still a troll.
You are trolling a little. You mischaracterized what Dodd said:
“Less than a week from the first College Football Playoff Rankings, the Big 12 knows one thing for sure: The conference has to produce an undefeated team to assure itself of getting in.”
That could be said about any conference.
LikeLike
bullet,
“Loftin is still a troll.”
He may be, but I’m guessing that’s his honest opinion.
“You are trolling a little. You mischaracterized what Dodd said:”
I almost directly quoted the headline.
Headline: If Big 12 wants in CFP, a team better go undefeated
me: “The B12 needs an undefeated team in order to make the CFP according to Dennis Dodd.”
Dodd: “Less than a week from the first College Football Playoff Rankings, the Big 12 knows one thing for sure: The conference has to produce an undefeated team to assure itself of getting in.”
I wasn’t intending to misrepresent anything. Perhaps you feel the headline writer mischaracterized the article, but I actually don’t think he did.
“That could be said about any conference.”
Not really. I’m quite sure 12-1 AL would make it. 12-1 OSU would have a decent shot.
As the article went on to point out, the B12’s three undefeateds could end up 11-1 due to the round robin. And last year showed that 12-1 P5 CCG winners have an edge over 11-1 B12 co-champs that played a terrible OOC schedule. The games being so late in the season make it even harder for a B12 team to recover in the rankings from a loss.
So 11-1 TCU/Baylor/OkSU would potentially be in trouble compared to 12-1 ACC/B10/P12/SEC champs. Especially if an 11-1 ND is also out there. And the ACC, B10 and SEC all could have 13-0 champs at this point.
LikeLike
The Big 12’s biggest risk is late losses. The committee still has recency bias. Baylor/TCU/OSU/OU all play each other over a 4 week period ending TG weekend. So 3 of the last 4 games for all of them but Baylor who plays 12/5 vs. Texas, so its 3 of last 5 for them.
LikeLike
And Dodd did make mention of the timing of those games as a factor.
LikeLike
The Big 12’s biggest risk is late losses. The committee still has recency bias.
There’s not enough data to say how a recent loss will “bias” the Committee.
It’s also worth asking whether that counts as a “bias” at all, or if it’s simply the way it ought to work. Most people would say that recent information ought to weigh more heavily. Certainly the traditional polls have already done that.
Recency bias certainly wasn’t a factor last year. The two spurned Big 12 teams, Baylor and TCU, each suffered their only loss in mid-October, giving them plenty of time to make up ground.
What seemed to hurt them, was not the recency of their loss, but merely that they lost. The Committee gave a boost to other leagues’ one-loss champions, because those leagues played an extra game, and therefore had an extra chance to beat a good opponent.
It also mattered that Baylor’s non-conference schedule was a complete joke. TCU’s was slightly better (not by much)—but they lost to Baylor.
LikeLike
There is a lot of ridiculous recency bias. 1977 is one that stands out in my mind. Texas was #1 ranked and unbeaten, having handed OU (in Dallas) and Arkansas (in Fayettville) their only defeats while cruising through the rest of the schedule. Kentucky lost early to Baylor, but handed Penn St. their only loss in Happy Valley.
Texas lost to Notre Dame in their bowl, while Arkansas beat OU, Kentucky didn’t play and Penn St. won their bowl game. In the final poll Texas fell behind Arkansas and Kentucky fell behind Penn St. They jumped Arkansas and PSU over teams who beat them while playing on the road because they won bowl games and the other team didn’t.
Pollsters do that all the time. That is bias and is pretty ridiculous.
LikeLike
Bullet:
A playoff is by definition an exercise of recency being primary. Did LSU or Alabama get crowned in a year they were 1-1?
I do agree that sometimes the best team in a given year isn’t recognized as champion (happens more often in the BB sports). But, when you go to a playoff that isn’t the goal. It’s to crown a tournament champ, no matter their pre game rank.
LikeLike
@bullet: You said, “The committee still has recency bias.” How pollsters behaved in 1977 has nothing to do with what the committee will do in 2015. Your 1977 example is especially bad, because it occurred under a system we no longer have.
Pollsters do that all the time. That is bias and is pretty ridiculous.
Is it “ridiculous” that recent results are more heavily weighed than results from longer ago? That’s a feature, not a bug.
Yeah, Kentucky narrowly defeated Penn State on October 1, 1977. But Penn State later defeated two top-15 teams, while Kentucky faced no one else ranked that high. The Nittany Lions also played one more game, and I don’t know how a poll voter is supposed to evaluate that.
How badly should the polls punish #1 Texas for laying an egg in its bowl game against Notre Dame? How much should they reward #6 Arkansas for demolishing #2 Oklahoma? How much should Texas’ 4-point win over Arkansas in mid-October count in the analysis? I don’t think those questions have easy answers.
Of course, if the same season were played today, those teams would have different opponents, and a No. 5 team wouldn’t have had the chance to jump to #1 with a solid bowl win over the previous #1. Kentucky would have a bowl game in which to state its case.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“There’s not enough data to say how a recent loss will “bias” the Committee.
It’s also worth asking whether that counts as a “bias” at all, or if it’s simply the way it ought to work. Most people would say that recent information ought to weigh more heavily. Certainly the traditional polls have already done that.”
That’s a very good point that many people ignore. The only thing people agree on is that all games should matter. How much weight each game should get is a matter of opinion. Some people want each game weighted equally. Others believe the most recent game should be by far the most important result. Then you have bowl games which some treat like a separate season due to the long layoff while some others treat them just like any other game.
Should games against good teams matter more than games against bad teams? Should who you beat matter more than who beats you? Should location be considered? Should familiarity/rivalry be considered? Should you rank teams based on what they’ve accomplished or how good you think they are? Should recency matter? There are valid arguments for both sides of all of those arguments.
“What seemed to hurt them, was not the recency of their loss, but merely that they lost. The Committee gave a boost to other leagues’ one-loss champions, because those leagues played an extra game, and therefore had an extra chance to beat a good opponent.”
I disagree. I don’t think it was 13 vs 12, I think it was the quality of those last games for each team and what the results meant.
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..
TCU, FSU, OSU and Baylor we’re basically even heading into the final weekend according to the committee, but ranked in that respective order. In the final poll, TCU dropped behind all 3 of the others but everything else stayed the same.
Final weekend’s events (in order of quality of win):
* OSU crushed #11 WI
* Baylor beat #9 KSU by 11
* FSU beat #12 GT by 2
* TCU crushed ISU
Meaning (in order of value):
* FSU, OSU and Baylor increased their SOS significantly
* FSU finished undefeated
* OSU and FSU became outright P5 conference champions
* Baylor became a P5 co-champ
* TCU became a P5 co-champ with a head to head loss to the other co-champ
Result:
* Baylor did nothing to merit passing OSU and FSU
* OSU did nothing to merit passing FSU (13-0 vs 12-1 matters)
* Winning outright P5 championships against top 15 teams moves FSU and OSU past TCU
* Beating a top 15 team moves Baylor past TCU, especially with the head to head win
LikeLike
I think Brian correctly characterized Dodd’s article. If the Committee works the way it did last year, a one-loss Big 12 champ will be disadvantaged, compared to a one-loss champ of any other league.
Of course, it’s too soon to say whether the rest of the leagues will have one-loss or undefeated champions, but if you’re the Big 12, you can’t hang your hat on multiple losses happening in other leagues.
LikeLike
BTN released their schedule for wrestling coverage this season as the B10 goes for a 10th consecutive national title. In addition to BTN match coverage, 73 more matches will be on BTN Plus and there will be a weekly wrestling show on Monday nights.
According to InterMat’s rankings, the Big Ten has three of the top four squads in the country with No. 1 Penn State, No. 3 Iowa and No. 4 Michigan. Also projected in the top-10 is No. 7 Nebraska and No. 8 Ohio State.
LikeLike
ACC Network -ESPN says not so fast.
http://www.myajc.com/news/sports/college/acc-channel-launch-facing-delay/npBsW/?icmp=ajc_internallink_referralbox_free-to-premium-referral
The launch of an ACC network run in partnership with ESPN, which has been expected for 2017, will likely take longer than expected.
The cable giant has asked for the delay, according to Georgia Tech president G.P. “Bud” Peterson, who made the statement at last week’s Georgia Tech Athletic Association quarterly board meeting. Conversations between the league and network are ongoing. The conference and network have discussed partnering on a dedicated ACC channel at least five years.
“(ESPN) had come back and said that in some of the other instances where (conference) networks have started, they lost considerable amounts of money in the first couple of years,” Peterson said. “What they’d like to do is delay the start for a couple years and do the necessary preparation.”
In exchange for a later start date, ESPN could make additional payments on top of the rights fees already paid to the conference, Peterson said. The conference signed an extension with ESPN in 2012 to continue their partnership through the 2026-27 academic year, a deal that was renegotiated with the addition of Notre Dame later that year and a grant of rights agreement in 2013. The league reportedly received $197.2 million in TV revenues in 2013-14. While the average distribution to full league members of $19.3 million distribution was considerable, it lagged behind the Big Ten ($26.4 million), Pac-12 ($21 million), SEC ($20.9 million) and Big 12 ($19.8 million).
It is a significant reason why the ACC and member schools are interested in their own network, similar to cable channels for the Big Ten and SEC. Both conferences have seen television revenues increase dramatically after the start of their networks. This past May, for instance, the SEC projected revenues of $31.2 million per school for the 2014-15 fiscal year, a 49 percent jump from the previous year due in no small part to the launch of the SEC Network in 2014.
Evidently, the request to delay from 2017 is a result of ESPN’s desire to properly time the launch of an ACC channel, wanting to ensure broad distribution with cable operators.
The Big Ten Network faced distribution challenges early on, as it was carried by a limited number of cable providers for the first year of its existence. Likewise, the Pac-12 Networks have had distribution issues of their own.
The SEC Network, with its conference’s rabid following, didn’t have the same troubles, as demands by fans to cable and satellite companies to add the network led to broad distribution from the network’s inception.
Perhaps the league’s strongest selling point to ESPN is its footprint, which extends almost the entire length of the Eastern seaboard and into the Midwest with Notre Dame. Two years ago, the league claimed the highest population (107 million) and most television households (38 million) within its footprint of any conference in the country, an area that includes major markets such as New York, Washington, Boston, Miami and Atlanta.
It probably helps, too, that Florida State and Clemson’s football teams have grown stronger in recent seasons and that the league’s basketball teams remain as powerful as ever.
Regardless, a channel dedicated to the ACC will have to wait a few more years.
LikeLike
With ESPN announcing another round of layoffs, I’m not sure they’ll ever want to start the ACCN. It probably makes more financial sense to just pay the ACC an extra $2M per school to avoid the hassle of the network.
LikeLike
They already are making money off most of what would be ACCN inventory. Why introduce a new cost? I don’t think it’d lose money, but an ACCN might make less for espn than the current arrangement. One of the risks of being “owned” by a corporation is the corporate needs/requirements are primary.
LikeLike
It’d lose money at first due to upfront costs is my guess.
LikeLike
They already are making money off most of what would be ACCN inventory. Why introduce a new cost? I don’t think it’d lose money, but an ACCN might make less for espn than the current arrangement.
The purpose of a conference network is not to migrate content away from the existing ESPN deal. The purpose is to aggregate third-tier content that the more highly visible networks don’t have room for.
The theory is that when you aggregate third-tier content at the league level, and put it under a high-profile name, you can get the most rabid fans to pay extra for it. That has worked everywhere it has been tried, and it will work for the ACC.
What ESPN won’t do is over-pay, as they did for the Longhorn network. The ACCN isn’t going to be as lucrative as the other conference networks, because fan support is weak in so much of their footprint.
LikeLike
Marc:
“The purpose of a conference network is not to migrate content away from the existing ESPN deal. The purpose is to aggregate third-tier content that the more highly visible networks don’t have room for.”
That’s my point. What content of any value is not already spoken for?
LikeLike
“The purpose of a conference network is not to migrate content away from the existing ESPN deal. The purpose is to aggregate third-tier content that the more highly visible networks don’t have room for.”
That’s my point. What content of any value is not already spoken for?
I have assumed the ACC, like other leagues before their networks were created, had a hodge-podge of deals with other third-tier content providers. That content would migrate as those deals expire.
Otherwise, I agree that all the value is already spoken for.
LikeLike
““(ESPN) had come back and said that in some of the other instances where (conference) networks have started, they lost considerable amounts of money in the first couple of years,” ”
What networks (plural)? BTN maybe, and….the MTN? P12N isn’t making a ton but was said to be in the black from year one, and the SECN is supposedly the greatest network launch in history. LHN doesn’t count, it isn’t a conference network, in spite of what Austin thinks. 😉
LikeLike
Maybe ESPN is including all the upfront costs and the P12 wasn’t? Maybe even the SECN didn’t technically cover all the upfront costs. We all know the accountants can make the numbers say whatever the bosses want to hear.
LikeLike
I think ESPN doesn’t want to reduce profit migrating current inventory, or purchasing what they don’t currently control. If I recall correctly P12N was said to cover startup costs with the original four providers who came on board at the official announcement of the P12N.
What (significant) startup costs for SECN? Schools had to provide and upgrade on campus facilities, and central office/studio is espn’s existing facility (not in SEC footprint). Only real cost I see is what they are paying for the inventory that is on ESPN’s SECN.
Isn’t this basically ESPN not wanting to renegotiate existing contracts in order to willingly pay more? What can/could the ACC bargain with? Threat of collapse/defections during the GOR? Not much leverage.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“What (significant) startup costs for SECN? Schools had to provide and upgrade on campus facilities, and central office/studio is espn’s existing facility (not in SEC footprint). Only real cost I see is what they are paying for the inventory that is on ESPN’s SECN.”
Buying out those other deals. Talent. Whatever else accountants could shift around the books.
“Isn’t this basically ESPN not wanting to renegotiate existing contracts in order to willingly pay more? What can/could the ACC bargain with? Threat of collapse/defections during the GOR? Not much leverage.”
Supposedly the ACC deal included language about ESPN either doing an ACCN or bumping up their payments within a reasonable time period. Obviously I don’t know if that’s true.
LikeLike
I recall the number 2M per school if they decided not to do an ACCN. It wasn’t specified, but seemed like a one time payment as I recall it seeming like a cheap enough promise to get the then new long term contract done.
LikeLike
While the ACC may have the biggest total population footprint (I notice that they are counting IN and ND as well), in that footprint, only in VA, NC, NY, and MA are they the only P5 conference, and in NY and MA, Syracuse and BC are afterthoughts compared to the pro teams. In the big population states of GA and PA, they are decidely #2. So they only have a core of NC and VA that they can count on. That’s going to make getting carriage at a decent rate in the big media markets (outside the NC and VA core) pretty difficult.
Compare to a roughly 87M footprint for the B10 and 95M footprint for the SEC. However, the B10 dominates everywhere in its footprint (it has to share PA and IA, but its schools are the top dog in those states) and it has big media markets on its border (NYC, DC, & StL) that it can reach in to.
Meanwhile, while the SEC doesn’t have a strong claim on Texas, it dominates everywhere else in its footprint (except maybe SC, but that’s a low-population state).
LikeLike
While the ACC may have the biggest total population footprint (I notice that they are counting IN and ND as well), in that footprint, only in VA, NC, NY, and MA are they the only P5 conference, and in NY and MA, Syracuse and BC are afterthoughts compared to the pro teams.
Even the lowly Big East (the version of it that had football) used to claim, as part of its footprint, the whole population of any state where it had a school. This is obviously nonsense. Very few New Yorkers would value a separate network just because Syracuse football is on it.
LikeLike
Syracuse is 250 miles from NYC and its suburbs. Cuse is not particularly relevant to NYC, or the suburbs (Long Island, Westchester Co, etc.). It is not so much that Syracuse football is an afterthought to the Giants and Jets, as much as Cuse football is not a New York City thing, at all.
In upstate NY, Cuse may be an afterthought to the Buffalo Bills.
When there was a Big East, St John’s basketball had a much bigger impact in the City than Cuse football. In Pennsylvania, the ACC has Pitt. What is the impact of Pitt versus PSU, and for that matter even Temple and Rutgers in Eastern PA?.
The only P5 school with a chance to really claim serious ownership of NYC would be Rutgers (less than 50 miles away). Of course to do that, RU will need to be a winner.
LikeLike
Syracuse is merely the most ridiculous example of counting the population of a whole state in a league’s “footprint,” just because there is a school in that state. I do know where Syracuse is located.
If you don’t like that example, consider Boston College. It’s only six miles from Boston, but it’s just as crazy to think of the Eagles as “delivering” the Massachusetts market.
When there was a Big East, St John’s basketball had a much bigger impact in the City than Cuse football.
Yes it did, but not to the extent that a hypothetical Big East network would get basic carriage in NYC because it would show some St. John’s games.
In Pennsylvania, the ACC has Pitt. What is the impact of Pitt versus PSU, and for that matter even Temple and Rutgers in Eastern PA?
Eastern PA has some fans of all those teams, but Penn State football drives the bus in the state.
The only P5 school with a chance to really claim serious ownership of NYC would be Rutgers (less than 50 miles away). Of course to do that, RU will need to be a winner.
The kind of passionate fandom we’re talking about, is accumulated over generations; passed down from parents to children. It would take years of sustained winning for Rutgers to make a dent in the NYC sports consciousness.
LikeLike
Dan Wolken has some interesting tweets on ACC and revenue.
Again, it’s not the football product. The SEC $$ is getting bigger every year. The Big Ten is about to get paid. The ACC is falling behind.
Dan Wolken @DanWolken · 1h1 hour ago
Dan Wolken Retweeted Colin Thompson
It’s not about the playoff. It’s about revenue. The ACC is No. 5
Dan Wolken added,
Colin Thompson @colinthompson87 @DanWolken an undefeated ACC Champion gets in. Agree a 1 loss champion would be out
Dan Wolken @DanWolken · 1h1 hour ago
And that is not me interpreting. The term “Power 4” has been uttered to me by high ranking officials at multiple ACC schools.
Dan Wolken @DanWolken · 1h1 hour ago
I’ll say this. Several admins at ACC schools are worried that the Power 5 is really a Power 4 and they’re on the outside. This is a big deal
LikeLike
Eh. It’s really a Power 2 (+Texas & maybe OU) + 3 (-Texas & maybe OU).
The ACC isn’t really all that far behind non-RRR B12 or the Pac, if at all.
LikeLike
Eh. It’s really a Power 2 (+Texas & maybe OU) + 3 (-Texas & maybe OU).
The ACC isn’t really all that far behind non-RRR B12 or the Pac, if at all.
Except…the Pac-12 faces no threats to its existence. There is no adjacent conference with the power to poach it. In fact, it’s the opposite: in the next round, they could poach either two or four schools from the Big 12. The Pac-12 will never match SEC or Big 10 money, but they will always be safe.
The Big 12 obviously has to worry about losing either Texas or Oklahoma, but those two schools do have compelling reasons to stay put.
That leaves the ACC in a pretty clear fifth position, with two very powerful neighbors ready to gnaw on its bones, a highly heterogeneous group of schools who are together more for convenience than tradition, and multiple members who could almost definitely make a lot more money elsewhere, if the invitation comes.
LikeLike
The core of the ACC (specifically, UNC, which is thw lynchpin) has strong reasons to stay put as well. Just like the key to the B12 is whether Texas gets paid enough to be happy, the key to the ACC is does UNC get paid enough to be happy. With their radio revenue for basketball, they may well be.
LikeLike
The core of the ACC (specifically, UNC, which is the lynchpin) has strong reasons to stay put as well. Just like the key to the B12 is whether Texas gets paid enough to be happy, the key to the ACC is does UNC get paid enough to be happy. With their radio revenue for basketball, they may well be.
No, the key to the ACC is whether the most powerful football schools stay. North Carolina may be the power center of the ACC, but their football brand is fairly weak. Football is what drives revenue.
Florida State is the ACC’s most powerful football school. They don’t have the same historical ties to the league that the North Carolina schools do. The ACC’s existential threat is that the Seminoles get a better offer, perhaps taking others with them. A league called the ACC would still exist, as long as the Tar Heels remain, but it would be left with a football brand like the old Big East, teetering on the brink of becoming a mid-major.
What makes the ACC different, is that its core schools are powerless to keep it intact, because they lack a strong football brand.
LikeLike
No, the power FB centric schools are powerless to truly effect the existence of the ACC whereas the B12(minus four plus a BEast and a WAC/MWC) are completely dependent on two (arguably one). Which conference looks more mid major? I don’t really know, but one looks more stable long term, and has ND as a potential trump card.
LikeLike
Eventually, Clemson and Florida State (possibly Virginia Tech as well) will have had enough with the ACC and its lack of a football-centric culture, especially if their revenue falls further behind its SEC peers and recruiting declines. Unless the SEC does an about-face and takes them in or they suddenly develop the academic heft to qualify for the Big Ten, I could see Clemson and FSU wait until a decade or so from now, then cast their lot with the Big 12 (wouldn’t they be stronger entrants than Brigham Young or Cincinnati?). Meanwhile, UNC and its hoops-first Triangle buddies can watch the ACC decline into a permanent #5 position…but they won’t care.
Maryland’s decisiob to go B1G looks smarter every day.
LikeLike
Except that the B12 is even more precarious than the ACC, being dependent on the whims of Texas. The ACC being able to entice over Texas with an ND-like arrangement is more likely.
LikeLike
Except that the B12 is even more precarious than the ACC, being dependent on the whims of Texas. The ACC being able to entice over Texas with an ND-like arrangement is more likely.
I don’t know which is more likely, but it’s totally understandable why the ACC is more visibly worried.
They went up to 15 members, purportedly for stability, but that gives them 15 mouths to feed, and their existence as a power league is almost totally dependent on FSU not getting a better offer.
The Big 12 has a better TV deal, and only needs to feed 10. They cease to exist if TX and OK leave, but the other eight members aren’t going to complain about that: what would be the point?
The idea of the ACC luring Texas with a ND-like deal seems more like a fan fantasy than anything that would really happen.
LikeLike
To me, it’s more likely that Florida State and Clemson would join forces with the Big 12 as full members within the next decade than Texas doing a Notre Dame-like quasi-independent shift to the ACC. Without FSU and Clemson, the ACC essentially is the old Big East football conference, comprised of schools that for the most part don’t take football as seriously (for better or for worse) than members of the B1G, SEC, Pac or Big 12 do. UNC can scream basketball until the cows come home, but ACC revenue will continue to diminish vis-a-vis its peers in other leagues.
Some other things to note this weekend — Frank Beamer is calling it a day at Virginia Tech (boy, there now are openings all over the place, and Maryland’s early dismissal of Edsall may not give it a jump on its competitors after all), and while it’s possible you could have foreseen Iowa State beating Texas, who’d ever have imagined the Cyclones would shut out the Longhorns?
LikeLike
To me, it’s more likely that Florida State and Clemson would join forces with the Big 12 as full members within the next decade than Texas doing a Notre Dame-like quasi-independent shift to the ACC.
That is also how I see it. I 14-team Big XII with FSU, Miami, Clemson, and a fourth school of your choice, would be a gold mine.
LikeLike
Perhaps Virginia Tech, if the Gobblers prove they aren’t K-State with Frank Beamer in the role of Bill Snyder. Tech and UVa aren’t joined at the hip; as long the Cavs stay on the schedule, Tech is free to go where it wants.
A 14-team Big 12, circa 2025?
East: Clemson, Florida State, Iowa State, Kansas, Miami, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
West: Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Okllahoma State, Texas, Texas Chrisitian, Texas Tech
That’s a pretty power-packed league.
Meanwhile, football-wise, the ACC would be shunted to the children’s table, both in public interest and revenue.
LikeLike
All indications are that VTech wants to be joined at the hip with UVa. They angled for decades to get in to the same conference as UVa.
LikeLike
Maybe that threat would be enough for UNC, UVA, Duke, etc to consider B1G and SEC moves. That would be an almost hilarious outcome.
LikeLike
Remind me why Georgia Tech would not be willing to go along as the 4th with FSU, Miami, and Clemson?
LikeLike
East: Clemson, Florida State, Iowa State, Kansas, Miami, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
strong>West: Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Okllahoma State, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
These are highly unbalanced divisions—the same problem the Big XII had when it had 12 teams.
By the time these moves could occur, I think CCG de-regulation will have been approved, and then there will be no need for divisions. To attract Florida State, you need to give them much more access to the sexy schools than what’s implied by the above alignment.
Oh, and Richard is right: VT lobbied hard to be in the same conference as UVA.
Remind me why Georgia Tech would not be willing to go along as the 4th with FSU, Miami, and Clemson?
Conferences are academic alliances, as much as they are athletic. Academics are the people who decide what conference a school is in. GT wants to be allied with fellow-AAU schools such as North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Pitt. The Big XII is not bereft of AAU schools, but it is not as academically strong a conference as the ACC.
Now, if GT sees that the ACC is toast, would it accept a Big XII offer? Perhaps, but it’s not where they want to be.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/14005424/usc-announces-plan-270-million-losangeles-memorial-coliseum-renovation
USC hopes to finally give the LA Coliseum a facelift. They’ve submitted plans for a privately funded $270M renovation that will drop capacity from 93,607 to 77,500 and add club seats, suites and luxury boxes.
The LA Times has more on it.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-usc-proposes-270-million-in-coliseum-upgrades-20151029-story.html
LikeLike
It says a lot about the long-term popularity of USC football, that they would sign up for a 17,000-person reduction in the capacity of the stadium. I don’t recall any major program shrinking their stadium to that degree.
The Coliseum is currently 9th in capacity, among FBS stadiums. After the renovation, it would be 20th (assuming all the others stay the same).
It would have a lower seating capacity than any “king” program’s stadium; lower than that of five Big Ten stadiums, eight SEC stadiums, plus Notre Dame, Texas, Oklahoma, Clemson, Florida State, or UCLA.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,.
“It says a lot about the long-term popularity of USC football, that they would sign up for a 17,000-person reduction in the capacity of the stadium. I don’t recall any major program shrinking their stadium to that degree.”
I’m not sure all of the reduction in capacity is voluntary.
From the ESPN piece:
Every seat will be replaced, and the reduced capacity will be a result of more aisles, wider seats and more legroom, according to the statement.
The LA Times mentioned adding handrails, too.
It’s a National Historic Landmark and a committee has to approve any changes, so adding more seats to replace those lost to changes may not be possible. I don’t know if any of these changes are needed to meet ADA standards or earthquake safety standards but renovations usually force you to come up to new codes.
They may not lose much money with the revenue from fancy seating replacing cheaper seats.
As for major programs reducing capacity, I think Standford leads the pack dropping from 85,500 to 50,000 in 2006. If you meant just the top 25 programs historically, then I don’t know if many have reduced capacity by this much.
“It would have a lower seating capacity than any “king” program’s stadium; lower than that of five Big Ten stadiums, eight SEC stadiums, plus Notre Dame, Texas, Oklahoma, Clemson, Florida State, or UCLA.”
Let’s be honest, ticket revenue is less important than ever now. TV brings in the money. Besides, artificially limiting supply means they can raise ticket prices.
LikeLike
They are trying to increase ticket revenue through quality, not quantity.
Stanford, Cal, USC and ASU will have all reduced capacity significantly. Washington reduced their capacity slightly. 6 schools in the Pac 12 are mid 50s or less. So that covers everyone but UCLA. And they are limited by January 1.
LikeLike
“And they are limited by January 1.”
?
LikeLike
They can’t really shrink the Rose Bowl while still hosting the Rose Bowl is his point I believe. UCLA may want it smaller but the Tournament of Roses doesn’t.
LikeLike
’93 Rose Bowl capacity 104,500+
’97 Rose Bowl capacity 98,600+
If current remodel lowers a few k it’ll be around 10k down.
Just pointing out while number of seats is important, it’s been losing importance for decades.
LikeLike
I’m not sure smaller is the goal, but a byproduct. Yes, the Rose Bowl wouldn’t want to decrease attendance much. But if a major refurbish/restructure was offered that generated significant upgrades (seismic, ADA, suites, $$$’s, etc) and would displace a few thousand seats I’d expect the Rose Bowl to at least entertain the possibility. Heck, USC has been tarping the end zone seating for a long time. Not sure 92k seats have been available for quite a while.
LikeLike
Actually, the Rose Bowl has been undergoing a $180M renovation the past few years including similar changes as the Coliseum is getting and is staying at over 92k.
LikeLike
USC has been tarping the end zone seating for a long time. Not sure 92k seats have been available for quite a while.
They’ve been tarping them due to lack of demand, which is sort of what I’ve been driving at. I am pretty sure that if they could regularly sell 92k, they wouldn’t be downsizing to 77k.
LikeLike
True. Just noting it is not a new phenomenon. As others have noted, the increase in televised games has given alternatives to fans and has more than made up for the loss at the gate with tv income (which is not subject to variability caused by weather, performance, etc. to the same extent).
LikeLike
As others have noted, the increase in televised games has given alternatives to fans and has more than made up for the loss at the gate with tv income (which is not subject to variability caused by weather, performance, etc. to the same extent).
Right, but Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State — programs that most would consider peers of USC — still regularly pack in over 100,000 fans. So do other prominent programs that have stadiums as large as, or larger than, the Coliseum will be after the renovation.
Michigan claims to have a >100,000 streak that goes back to the 1970s. They were papering the house regularly last season, and even then, they may have used some creative counting to get over 100k. But still, they never went anywhere near as low as the 77k that the Coliseum will have after its renovation.
Michigan Stadium went through an ADA compliance renovation a few years ago that did many of the same things the Coliseum is now doing (widening aisles, adding luxury boxes). They reduced capacity slightly, but not by anything like 15k seats.
LikeLike
I look at the pic and see enormous $ signs on all those new suites. I’d guess the strategy is make more from less. They are the University of $poiled Children. 😎 They’ve averaged 70-75k for a while. UCLA pulls a bit more, in the even larger Rose Bowl.
ASU was removing 10k from a 70 something stadium.
LikeLike
Would UCLA entertain a move to whichever NFL stadium gets built (Carson or Inglewood), particularly if some of those revenue enhancements (suites, club seats) are built-in to begin with? However the Rose Bowl location probably is much more preferred from a game-day environment stand point.
LikeLike
Yet another sign of financial trouble for the WWL to go along with high profile personal departures, layoffs, delayed channel launches and orders to cut $350 million from the 2017 and 2018 budgets; Grantland is officially dead.
http://espnmediazone.com/us/espn-statement-regarding-grantland/
I don’t want to sound like Chicken Little, but I think the Big Ten has to be at least a little worried that the windfall they were expecting as the last significant sports property to hit the market for a decade may not materialize (at least not to the degree they were anticipating).
LikeLike
Correction; the budget cuts are 2106-2017 ($100 million in ’16 and $250 million for ’17).
LikeLike
Whoops, here’s the source on the budget numbers (and on ESPN’s overall financial difficulties)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2015/07/10/disney-is-making-espn-do-some-serious-cost-cutting/
LikeLike
The WWL has a ton of fluff. I get ESPN the Magazine, and they flew a bunch of MLB stars in to take one photo:
http://espn.go.com/espn/photos/gallery/_/id/8915324/image/1/version/mobile/mlb-stars-devo-mlb-stars-re-create-devo-freedom-choice-espn-magazine-music-issue
They’ve been rolling in the fat for a long time now, and now they have to prioritize the stuff that actually makes them money while cutting the stuff that doesn’t. Just like the NBA, B10 football makes the WWL money. Grantland, Lou Holtz, and a studio on Times Square do not. And if you noticed, the NBA just got paid.
LikeLike
frug,
“Yet another sign of financial trouble for the WWL to go along with high profile personal departures, layoffs, delayed channel launches and orders to cut $350 million from the 2017 and 2018 budgets; Grantland is officially dead.”
I don’t think that’s really a sign of anything. Grantland basically died when Simmons was allowed to leave. It had been a rudderless ship since then. Deadspin had a nice article about it in July.
http://deadspin.com/no-one-knows-what-espn-is-doing-to-grantland-1718037323
“I don’t want to sound like Chicken Little, but I think the Big Ten has to be at least a little worried that the windfall they were expecting as the last significant sports property to hit the market for a decade may not materialize (at least not to the degree they were anticipating).”
It’s their job to worry, of course, but I don’t think the signs are all as bad as people say. Live sports is still the most valuable thing and the B10 is the one major property available in the near future. Some of this cost cutting could be a way to make financial space for the B10 bid.
It may make it more likely that ESPN and Fox split the rights, but many expected that anyway.
LikeLike
Vox has has an article that casts Grantland’s demise (along with other recent events) in a different context: “2015 is the year the old internet finally died”.
I am not arguing that Vox is right, and frug is wrong. It’s too soon to know.
The closure of an Internet news / commentary site like grantland is not exactly a surprise. “Website bites the dust” is a headline that has been written thousands of times. From that news, I wouldn’t infer that the Big Ten’s media rights are in any trouble. Live sporting events keep going up in value. That’s a trend that has never (yet) ended.
LikeLike
Not totally related, but here is an interesting article about ESPN’s business decisions over the past few years.
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2015/10/26/Media/ESPN.aspx
While some it reads like angry ex-employees venting (the article came out just after ESPN announced layoffs) it does make a few interesting points like exactly how much more ESPN is paying for sports rights and especially this
ESPN’s business model — the dual revenue streams of advertising revenue and affiliate fees — always has been its strength. It still is. But that model has had some challenges, mainly due to a decision ESPN made several years ago that has come back to hurt it. ESPN had several cable carriage renewals in 2012, including big ones with distributors Comcast, Cablevision and Cox.
At the time, ESPN wanted to increase the license fee distributors pay it to $6 per subscriber per month. So its executives cut deals that made sure that ESPN and ESPN2 would be on the highest-penetrated tiers of service — expanded basic. At the same time, ESPN lowered penetration benchmark levels from more than 90 percent of all subscribers to a number closer to 80 percent.
“That’s part of every cable negotiation I’ve done,” said one industry executive. “If you want to negotiate a higher rate, you have to have more flexibility on penetration.”
Over the ensuing few years, cable operators discovered the low-cost, skinny bundles and started marketing them without ESPN. Expanded basic still is the most popular tier, but the mini-tiers without ESPN have been gaining traction. As a result, ESPN wound up with a rate that was higher than they thought they would get. But they left themselves more vulnerable to subscriber losses than other cable networks.
ESPN’s subscriber losses, which have seen it lose nearly 8.5 million homes in the last 4 1/2 years, according to Nielsen estimates, or down about 8 percent, are at a rate that is declining faster than the rest of the industry.
“It’s not cord cutting; it’s cord shaving,” said one executive familiar with ESPN’s strategy. “ESPN is losing subscribers at a faster rate than others.”
LikeLike
The B10 will be fine. Note that the B10 can go several directions. They could offer a weekly primetime package (10-12 primetime games + pick of OOC games to add up to 20) to dangle in front of NBC at a markup ($160-200M just for that package) with Fox/ESPN taking the rest (40 games for $240-320M). Or they can tell Fox/ESPN that to keep the whole she-bang, they’d have to pay up.
Note that ESPN isn’t the only bidder. Fox really wants to build up FS1. NBC has nothing on primetime on Saturdays (neither does CBS, but I don’t see them jumping in)*. And ESPN needs the B10 as well. The only conference they have full access to is the ACC. They share the Pac and B12 with Fox. They can not show SEC games in the afternoon slot. So without any B10 games, what will ABC/ESPN show opposite the SEC on CBS in the afternoon? An ACC game even though it’s largely in the footprint of the SEC and in the less popular league?
I’ll add more on this later. Not sure if I should start a WordPress site or of Frank will allow me to do a guest post on here.
*Well, the Bank of America 500, but one race can be worked around.
LikeLike
Also, this is key:
The B10 TV rights will be the last bite of the apple for a very long time. After the B10 does its deal, NO national live sports rights of any major sport will be hitting the open market for about a decade. If Fox wants to build up FS1 or ESPN wants to retain its market dominance or NBC wants to do anything outside of niche sports, this is it.
LikeLike
Sorry. Half a decade. Still a long time.
LikeLike
Richard,
“NBC has nothing on primetime on Saturdays”
They do show some ND games in primetime (2 this year). I don’t know if they have any other Saturday primetime sports.
LikeLike
NBC tries to get ND to play games in primetime because they have nothing else for primetime on Saturdays.
LikeLike
They have nothing at night, other than when the Irish play a home game at night, which is at most a couple of times a year.
LikeLike
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/press-releases/hancock-announces-pat-haden-will-step-down-from-selection-committee
Yet again the CFP committee will be down a man all season as Pat Haden bows out for health and business reasons.
He and Alvarez were the two ACC representatives on the committee, so someone else will have to pick up that role.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/selection-committee-protocol
Following are the point persons for 2015-16:
American – Tom Osborne and Condoleezza Rice
Atlantic Coast – Barry Alvarez
Big Ten – Dan Radakovich and Steve Wieberg
Big 12 – Condoleezza Rice and Bobby Johnson
Conference USA – Mike Gould and Tyrone Willingham
Mid-American – Mike Tranghese and Kirby Hocutt
Mountain West – Tom Jernstedt and Dan Radakovich
Pac-12 – Steve Wieberg and Kirby Hocutt
Southeastern – Tyrone Willingham and Mike Tranghese
Sun Belt – Tom Osborne and Bobby Johnson
Independents – Tom Jernstedt and Mike Gould
Unfortunately, Alvarez is the only person with only 1 conference to study. I’d suggest adding Alvarez to the Independents list and move one of the Independents guys (I’d choose Gould) to the ACC.
LikeLike
ACC refs vault to the top of the most incompetent of the week. The PAC still has two games in progress, but that’ll be hard to surpass.
LikeLike
The flag for the block in the back should have been picked up (even if it isn’t reviewable), and you can argue that the guy who’s knee was down already didn’t have possession of the ball. However, there was a clear block in the back earlier on that was missed. Yet my favorite was that dude without a helmet running on to the field before the runner had crossed in to the endzone.
Still, as a neutral observer, allowing the TD to stand makes it far more epic.
LikeLike
“Still, as a neutral observer, allowing the TD to stand makes it far more epic.”
Only if you are looking for a fairy tail ending without concern about how it was achieved.
All the endogenous people died or were displaced…but the settlers discovered gold/furs/etc and lined happily ever after…
LikeLike
The ACC has now suspended the entire crew for 2 games based on 4 mistakes on the final play.
LikeLike
Eh. I only counted 2.5.
LikeLike
There’s four bullets…four mistakes. I do think, quite subjectively, that if the first two had been called correctly, the latter two probably would not have resulted in a suspension, since neither affected the outcome. They were errors nonetheless.
LikeLike
You can argue that the knee being down was debatable (I would say that the player already didn’t have control of the ball when his knee was down).
Lots of comedy elsewhere though, true.
LikeLike
0 & 1 loss teams after 9 weeks and who picked up 2nd loss
________________________________________________
ACC 21.43% / 14 teams / 3 teams remain
(1) | 8-0 Clemson
(2) | 7-1 Florida State and North Carolina
(x) | Duke and Pittsburgh picked up 2nd loss
B12 40.00% / 10 teams / 4 teams remain
(3) | 8-0 TCU and Oklahoma State + 7-0 Baylor
(1) | 7-1 Oklahoma
(x) | none this week
B1G 21.43% / 14 teams / 3 teams remain
(3) | 8-0 Michigan State, Ohio State, and Iowa
(0) | none this week
(x) | none this week
PAC 16.67% / 12 teams / 2 teams remain
(0) | last undefeated eliminated in Week 8
(2) | 7-1 Utah and Stanford
(x) | none this week
SEC 21.43% / 14 teams / 3 teams remain
(1) | 7-0 LSU
(2) | 7-1 Alabama and Florida
(x) | none this week
IND 33.33% / 3 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 7-1 Notre Dame
————————————————
AAC 33.33% / 12 teams / 4 teams remain
(2) | 8-0 Memphis and Houston
(2) | 7-1 Temple + 6-1 Navy
(x) | none this week
CUSA 7.69% / 13 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 8-1 Marshall
(x) | none this week
MAC 7.69% / 13 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 7-0 Toledo
(0) | none this week
MWC 0.00% / 12 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 7
SUN 9.09% / 11 teams / 1 team remains
(1) | 7-1 Appalachian State
(x) | none this week
.
…
.
Week 10 games – undefeated teams in BOLD
________________________________________________
ACC vs ACC
Duke @ North Carolina
Florida State @ Clemson
B12 vs B12
Baylor @ Kansas State
TCU @ Oklahoma State
Iowa State @ Oklahoma
B1G vs B1G
Iowa @ Indiana
Michigan State @ Nebraska
Minnesota @ Ohio State
PAC vs PAC
Stanford @ Colorado
Utah @ Washington
SEC vs SEC
Vanderbilt @ Florida
LSU @ Alabama
IND vs ACC
Notre Dame @ Pittsburgh
————————————————
AAC vs AAC
Temple @ SMU
Cincinnati @ Houston
Navy @ Memphis
CUSA vs CUSA
Marshall @ Middle Tennessee
MAC vs MAC
Northern Illinois @ Toledo
SUN vs SUN
Arkansas State @ Appalachian State
LikeLike
A CFP preview with the first set of rankings coming out Tuesday.
P5 Contenders (0-1 losses, bold means undefeated) = 16:
ACC A – Clemson, FSU (play 11/7)
ACC C – UNC
B10 E – OSU, MSU (play 11/21)
B10 W – IA
B12 – Baylor, TCU, OkSU, OU (play all November)
P12 N – Stanford
P12 S – Utah
SEC E – UF
SEC W – LSU, AL (play 11/7)
Other – ND
G5 contenders (0 losses) = 3:
AAC W – UH, Memphis (play 11/14)
MAC W – Toledo
LikeLike
(1) | 8-1 Marshall / probably eliminated week 2
(2) | 7-1 Temple / probably eliminated w 9 + 6-1 Navy / probably eliminated w 8
(1) | 7-1 Toledo / probably eliminated week 10
(1) | 7-1 Appalachian State / probably eliminated week 2
Tuesday, Toledo lost
Thursday, Baylor won // Appalachian State lost
LikeLike
There were a lot of close games and exciting finishes yesterday but very little movement in the polls as the favorites generally pulled out the win.
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches Poll:
1. OSU
2. Baylor
3. TCU
4. LSU
5. Clemson
6. MSU
7. AL
8. Stanford
9. ND
10. OkSU
11. IA
17. MI
21. UNC +7
23. Temple -1
26. WI
Duke, Pitt and UGA dropped out.
SEC – 6/14 (43%) – includes #24 and #25
B12 – 4/10 (40%) – all top 13
B10 – 4/14 (29%)
P12 – 3/12 (25%)
AAC – 3/12 (25%)
ACC – 3/14 (21%)
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
AP Poll:
1. OSU
2. Baylor
3. Clemson
4. LSU
5. TCU
6. MSU
7. AL
8. ND
9. Stanford
10. IA
16. MI
21. UNC +6
23. Temple -2
26. WI
29. NW
31. PSU
Duke and Pitt dropped out.
SEC – 6/14 (43%) – includes #24 and #25
B12 – 4/10 (40%) – all top 14
B10 – 4/14 (29%) – all top 16
P12 – 3/12 (25%)
AAC – 3/12 (25%)
ACC – 3/14 (21%)
LikeLike
The SEC football schedule was released last week.
Here’s the OOC P5 games.
Bama v. USCw at Arlington, TX
Arkansas @ TCU
Auburn v. Clemson
Florida @ Florida State
Georgia v. North Carolina at Atlanta
Georgia v. GA Tech
Kentucky @ Louisville
LSU v. Wisconsin at Green Bay
Ole Miss v. Florida State at Orlando
Miss. State @ BYU
Mizzou @ West VA
South Carolina @ Clemson
Tennessee v. VA Tech at Bristol, VA
A&M v. UCLA
Vandy @ GA Tech
ACC: 9 games
P-12 & B-12: 2 games each
B1G & Ind: 1 game each
Five neutral site games
LikeLike
Wow. 4 OOC games for each team, and only Georgia plays more than 1 game against a Power-5 school. I don’t see the SEC ever successfully winning an argument for a 2nd playoff team with this OOC scheduling unless it adds a 9th conference game. Given the weakness of the bottom-tier of the conference, I am surprised there is so much resistance to the 9th conference game.
LikeLike
My prediction on the CFP Committee ranking tonight.
1. Clemson (wins over ND (7-1), then NCST (5-3) and Miami (5-3) and Louisville (4-4))
2. LSU (wins over FL (7-1), MSST (6-2))
3. tOSU (PSU (7-2) and defending nat. champ.(and I guess Indiana @ 4-4))
4. Iowa (wins over Northwestern (6-2), Wiscy (6-2) and Pitt (6-2) and IL (4-4))
Then:
5. MSU (wins over MI (6-2) and Oregon (5-3))
6. TCU (better OOC sched. than Baylor))
7. Baylor
8. Okie State
I think for the first week, the Committee goes with the zero-loss teams. Personally, I don’t see any reason to put a one-loss team ahead of a zero-loss team.
Re the BXII trio: Not a solid win among them. Of the teams beaten by the Trio, only TTech has a winning record (5-4) and the four losses are to BA (63-35), TCU (55-52), Okie State (70-53) and to OK (63-27). No other team any of them have played has a winning record.
Then the one-loss teams:
9. ‘Bama (good wins: Wiscy, GA, MSST; good loss: Ole Miss)
10. Florida (GA and Ole Miss; good loss to LSU)
11. ND (USC (meh), Georgia Tech (meh), and Temple (meh); good loss to Clemson)
12. Stanford (bad loss to NwU, so maybe UTAH goes here; but they HAVE been beating their opponents to death)
13. FLST (bad loss, “meh” wins; probably should be lower)
14. UTAH (good win over Michigan; beat the heck out of OR; could be higher)
15. OK (no good wins yet; bad loss to TX)
16. NCST (just meh in general).
I predict the Committee will not rank Memphis higher than 17. Good win obviously over Ole Miss, but beyond that, very “meh.”
General thoughts on the BXII. I think they get left out again in the final rankings.
As a whole conference, they have not played very many Power 5 teams (only 8 games and two were by TX — so 3 of their teams did not play a Power 5 team; KState, Baylor & OkieState).
As a whole conference, they only have four “good” wins over power 5 teams (but those are not very good “good wins”). OK beat TN (4-4); TT beat Arky (4-4); TCU beat Minn (4-4); and WVir beat MD (2-6). That is it. Otherwise, TX lost to ND and CAL; Iowa State lost to Iowa and KS lost to Rutgers.
That hurts the whole conference. Add to that: no conference champ game. BXII gonna get left out again.
LikeLike
To clarify: I don’t think TODAY, there is any reason to put ‘Bama (or any other one-loss team) ahead of any zero-loss team. They are all going to play each other in the next couple-three weeks. Let it sort itself out and then start putting the one-loss teams into the top 4. But, hey, that is my preference.
It will be interesting to see what the Committee does.
LikeLike
General thoughts on the BXII. I think they get left out again in the final rankings.
There is no way an undefeated Big XII team would be left out. Their SOS is weak right now, but will get better as the leaders start playing each other.
I do agree that a one-loss Big XII champ would be at a disadvantage, just like last year.
LikeLike
I think it is too strong to say “no way.” A one-loss Stanford (assuming an upcoming win over ND) could — emphasize COULD — look better than a zero-loss Baylor (given who Baylor has played).
But I think it unlikely. I think the Committee will adhere to the idea that zero-loss P5 teams get in the Playoff.
LikeLike
Buckeyebeau,
“I think it is too strong to say “no way.””
I don’t. Well, other than having 5 or more undefeated P5 teams that is (which is highly implausible). No committee will ever keep an undefeated P5 champ out of the playoff in favor of a 1 loss team. No SOS difference could justify it. No amount of dominance in their wins could justify it. That 1-loss team could be the New England Patriots and they still wouldn’t jump over an undefeated P5 champ. Undefeated still means something.
“A one-loss Stanford (assuming an upcoming win over ND) could — emphasize COULD — look better than a zero-loss Baylor (given who Baylor has played).”
Nope. Not even if Stanford wins every game 100-0 and Baylor wins by 1.
LikeLike
🙂 As noted, I think the Committee will adhere to the idea of a zero-loss P5 Champ getting in the playoff. But I leave room for the possibility there might be some – some – confluence of games and scores that would warrant an exception.
If Iowa were to pull a miracle and beat the East Div. Champ and be zero-loss, should they be in over say, a one-loss ‘Bama? Hmm……
Pat Forde had a fun half an article imagining the nightmare scenario for the Committee.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/forde-yard-dash-043722504-ncaaf.html
A snippet:
“Now here is where it really gets fun, in the SEC: Alabama (18) beats LSU in Tuscaloosa on Saturday and wins out; Mississippi (19) beats LSU in Oxford Nov. 21 and wins out; and Florida (20) wins out to capture the East.
Thus you’d have an 11-1 Alabama team that played the toughest schedule of any playoff contender but didn’t even win its division; a 10-2 Ole Miss that is the champion of the West and beat ‘Bama in its backyard [but lost to Memphis]; and an 11-1 Florida team that lost to a team both the Crimson Tide and Rebels defeated.
Say Florida wins the SEC title game over Mississippi. You’d probably rank the Gators ahead of the Tide … but the SEC West would have been the much harder division. Nine thousand columns are written saying that it would be un-American to have a playoff without an SEC champ. Nine thousand more are written saying the SEC needs to get over its self-inferred birthright to play for the title. And a few hundred columns are written (in crayon) saying that God will rain death upon Glendale in January if the Tide is denied its rightful place in the bracket.”
I expect it all to “work out,” but boy o boy does that two-loss Ole Miss pose a giant potential pot hole for sanity in CFP. Part of me wants Ole Miss to win out just to see what happens. LOL
LikeLike
Buckeyebeau,
“But I leave room for the possibility there might be some – some – confluence of games and scores that would warrant an exception.”
And I don’t.
“If Iowa were to pull a miracle and beat the East Div. Champ and be zero-loss, should they be in over say, a one-loss ‘Bama?”
Yes. Unequivocally yes.
LikeLike
Stanford could only look better to a blind person. To finish unbeaten, Baylor has to win 3 games against top 14 schools, two of whom are currently unbeaten.
As for your “meh” about Memphis, the same applies to nearly all of the top teams other than one or two games. It applies to Alabama. It really applies to ALL of Ohio St.’s games-Virginia Tech, Hawaii, N. Illinois, W. Michigan, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers and even Penn St.
LikeLike
With the first rankings coming out, it’s important to remember that there are a ton of big games left in the season.
Nov. 7 – Florida State at Clemson, TCU at Oklahoma State, LSU at Alabama
Nov. 14 – Oklahoma at Baylor, Memphis at Houston
Nov. 21 – LSU at Ole Miss, TCU at Oklahoma, Baylor at Oklahoma State, Michigan State at Ohio State
Nov. 27 – Baylor at TCU
Nov. 28 – Ohio State at Michigan, Oklahoma at Oklahoma State, Texas A&M at LSU, Notre Dame at Stanford
Dec. 5 – Conference championship games.
LikeLike
Well, I got the top 3 right, but, clearly, beyond that, I know NOTHING !! 🙂
LikeLike
Nice article by Dodd @ CBS re: the playoff. He talked to the P5 Commissioners. Not a single hint, suggestion or anything “weasel” about expanding the CFP to 8 teams.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25361832/power-five-commissioners-dish-on-college-football-playoff-early-returns
LikeLike
A few tidbits:
* The presidents won’t let the championship game move later or let first round games move to mid-December. That kills expanding to 8.
* The B10 and Rose Bowl were hard enough to get on board for a 4 game playoff. It would take a lot to get them to agree to 8.
* The B12 and SEC (and probably ACC) will never agree to quarterfinals on campus because they are afraid of having to go north in winter.
* They like the controversy of having 4 teams with 5 major conferences. It keeps people even more interested.
LikeLike
One, maybe two of the B12 would care. The other eight would be ecstatic about the opportunity, wherever it was.
LikeLike
It’s the conference position that matters and all their best teams tend to be in TX and OK and will be against it.
LikeLike
I don’t put great credence in what the presidents say, since many of these same people were against any kind of playoff whatsoever, until only a few years ago. I do think the obstacles and drawbacks to an 8-team playoff are very real, and often overlooked by those who favor rapid expansion.
Every change to the CFB post-season has occurred incrementally and very slowly. The SEC’s Mike Slive used to tell how he once brought up the subject of a playoff, and the other power conference reps refused even to entertain the conversation. They didn’t change their tune for years.
The BCS and its short-lived, very similar predecessors, the Bowl Alliance and Bowl Coalition, lasted over 20 years. I would not be surprised if the 4-team playoff lasts at least that long.
LikeLike
I thought this comment from Bowsbey was interesting. Can anyone unpack this? What does “stand-alone games” mean (if not bowls)? Why would 3 and 7 be “more lucrative?”
Bowlsby (Big 12): “[Weaving the playoff into six bowls] is not the most lucrative model. The more lucrative model would be three stand-alone games [not necessarily in bowls] or seven stand-alone games.”
LikeLike
okay, can’t type: Bowlsby.
LikeLike
Leave the bowls out. That’s what stand-alone means.
LikeLike
What is the difference between a bowl and non-bowl? I mean, practically speaking? this is an honest question.
Definition of a bowl (I am guessing): name, fixed location, committee to run it, conference tie in, maybe a parade. What else?
Non-bowl: no fixed name, no fixed location, no committee? (but who runs it?), no conference tie in, no parade?
Bowlsby said the the non-bowls are more lucrative. Why? Call it a bowl, call it a non-bowl, it still a CFB game in a stadium somewhere between two teams. Why does calling it a “bowl” make it less lucrative?
LikeLike
Because a “bowl” committee doesn’t own the game or naming rights. ALL the revenue goes to the colleges-sponsorships, concessions, tickets, TV. No cuts for a middleman.
Also it gets bid every year instead of one group having it, creating competition.
LikeLike
The big impact would be the bidding out part, IMO.
In any case, I don’t see it happening soon.
LikeLike
3 non bowl games as semi and final. Presumably bowls as qtrs.
7 non bowl games qtrs thru final.
LikeLike
Remember, Bowlsby is a Pac 12/Big 10 guy. The Big 12 presidents were very much in favor of quarterfinals on campus. Bowlsby is just towing CFPP line and throwing in his own opinion, not those of the presidents. Both the Big 12 and ACC have northern teams.
LikeLike
Which presidents said they wanted quarter finals at all, let alone where?
LikeLike
The SEC and ACC made it clear a majority of them were for 8.
When they were talking about the location of the semi-finals, I think it was the Oklahoma St. president saying “our” position (meaning the Big 12) was that the semi-finals be on campus sites.
LikeLike
SEC ’cause they want 4/5 in, and ACC to be included most years? 😉
Actually I suspect support for 8 was more to offset those wanting more restrictive (conf champ requirement, only one per conf, etc) and make current setup look more middle of the road. We’ll be talking about 16 before we ever get to eight for similar reason.
LikeLike
I think it was semifinals on campus, not quarterfinals, that some of the Big XII presidents favored.
LikeLike
Bowlsby is first and foremost a B12 guy.
LikeLike
Hey, Can somebody remind me when the BiG begins playing a 9-game conference schedule? Can’t happen soon enough.
LikeLike
Next season.
LikeLike
Wow. MSU penalized for the fluke UMich ending but UMich not rewarded for it..
LikeLike
I think they treated that MSU game more like a tie.
#18 Ole Miss:
W – #4, #19
L – #10, #13
#17 MI:
W – #21
L – #7, #12
LikeLike
I have no real problem with the first rankings. MSU will move up if they win out. Same for everyone else.
LikeLike
My biggest problem is with ND being ranked too high.
Granted, results on the field will likely correct that error.
LikeLike
There are a lot of inconsistencies in the current rankings, but the next few weeks will take care of many of them anyway.
Why are AL and ND so high but UF so low? All the losses were close.
#4 AL
W – #19
L – #18
#5 ND
W – #22
L – #1
#10 UF
W – #18
L – #2
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25362662/cfp-chair-explains-why-alabama-topped-florida-in-playoff-rankings
Jeff Long tried to explain this by citing AL’s 3 wins over teams with winning records versus just 2 for UF. Unfortunately for him, #7 MSU happens to have 5 such wins right now and is undefeated.
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/11/04/college-football-playoff-rankings-alabama-crimson-tide
Long just has zero credibility.
SI writers-all 11 say Alabama at #4 can’t be justified.
LikeLike
All I can say for him is that he’s forced to defend the final decisions of the committee whether he agrees with them or not. And he can’t reveal details about the deliberation, so he takes all the blame despite being only 1 of 12 voters.
LikeLike
Why are AL and ND so high but UF so low? All the losses were close.
USA Today publishes a weekly composite of major computer polls. The composite has Alabama 3rd, Notre Dame 7th, Florida 10th — not far off from where the Committee had them.
The Committee doesn’t cop to relying on any computer poll for guidance, but the computer polls at least aren’t influenced by politics or recency bias: they just crunch numbers, and coincidentally, come up with an answer not far from what the humans did.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“USA Today publishes a weekly composite of major computer polls.”
Yes, it’s the BCS computers. And remember that the committee is supposed to be better because they take other factors into account. More importantly, they name certain criteria that they use.
“The composite has Alabama 3rd, Notre Dame 7th, Florida 10th — not far off from where the Committee had them.”
That has ND significantly closer to UF than the CFP does.
I realize they use a lot more than just top 25 wins and losses. But no human has provided a logical explanation for AL’s rank based on the criteria the committee said it used.
LikeLike
“USA Today publishes a weekly composite of major computer polls.”
Yes, it’s the BCS computers.
I think it’s the same pollsters the BCS used, although at least two of them (Sagarin and Massey) are no longer using the same algorithm. (The BCS did not allow margin of victory to be considered, because they felt it would incent coaches to run up the score, although most analysts believed that you get a worse evaluation by ignoring that factor.)
Massey also publishes a list of 116 different rankings. His composite (taking all of these into consideration) puts Alabama 4th, ND 6th, and Florida 8th — again, not that far off what the Committee did.
And remember that the committee is supposed to be better because they take other factors into account. More importantly, they name certain criteria that they use.
I agree with you that the stated explanation doesn’t hold water, which means they are probably relying on additional factors that they can’t or won’t articulate.
I am just pointing out that one can give intelligent reasons for ranking the teams where the Committee did, even though the Committee themselves have not given those reasons.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“I think it’s the same pollsters the BCS used,”
It is.
“although at least two of them (Sagarin and Massey) are no longer using the same algorithm.”
Both versions were available even back in the BCS era, the BCS just used the non-MOV versions.
“Massey also publishes a list of 116 different rankings. His composite (taking all of these into consideration) puts Alabama 4th, ND 6th, and Florida 8th — again, not that far off what the Committee did.”
And not one of those models (which include human polls) explain why each school is where. They just rank them.
“I am just pointing out that one can give intelligent reasons for ranking the teams where the Committee did, even though the Committee themselves have not given those reasons.”
I haven’t heard anyone else give them either (other than the eye test, i.e. personal opinion). And I’m not even saying they are necessarily wrong. But a panel should be able to explain why team A outranks team B in a logical and consistent way.
LikeLike
Brett McMurphy just tweeted that Atlanta (2018), Santa Clara (2019) and New Orleans (2020) have been awarded CFP Championship Games.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/14052099/atlanta-santa-clara-new-orleans-land-cfp-title-games-2018-20
Yep. And then Hancock spewed this lie:
Bill Hancock, the executive director of the College Football Playoff, said northern cities weren’t ruled out because of weather concerns and will “be very much in the hunt” to host future games.
“We do want to move the event around,” Hancock said. “It’s just that we had better bids and better situations in other cities.”
Here’s guessing they’ll always manage to have better bids and better situations in warm weather cities. They’re 0-6 in giving a northern city a chance on top of putting all the semifinals in the west or south.
LikeLike
Ummm, Santa Clara is a “northern” city. It will likely be in the 40s or 50s during that game, with rain also a very strong possibility.
LikeLike
No, it isn’t. It’s a western city.
LikeLike
I think we can all agree that the only teams left in the hunt for the CFP are zero or one loss P5 schools and Memphis. All are currently ranked in the CFP top 16.
#2 LSU, #6 Baylor, #8 TCU, #14 Okay State, and #15 Oklahoma! all play 3 teams ranked in the CFP top 19.
#3 Ohio State, #4 Bama, #13 Memphis, and #16 Florida State all play 2 teams ranked in the CFP top 22.
#1 Clemson, #5 Notre Dame, #7 Mich State, #10 Florida, #11 Stanford, and #12 Utah all play one team ranked in the CFP top 23.
#9 Iowa doesn’t play any ranked teams for the remainder of the regular season.
LikeLike
“#9 Iowa doesn’t play any ranked teams for the remainder of the regular season.”
That’s ok, they’ve already beat two ranked teams on the road, which only Alabama can match.
LikeLike
That’s not including CCGs.
B10 – IA vs OSU/MSU/MI
P12 – Stanford vs Utah/UCLA/USC (UCLA is #23, USC unranked)
SEC – LSU/AL/MS vs UF
And those are teams that are ranked right now. As you note, so many of the top teams still have to play each other that the rankings could change a lot over the month.
LikeLike
Yep, you can’t ignore CCG’s.
Counting the CCG, a B10 champ will play a minimum of 11 P5 teams. The SEC, ACC, and Pac will play a minimum of 10 P5 teams. The B12 will play a minimum of 9 P5 teams.
LikeLike
?
Only Iowa vs Michigan would guarantee that for B1G.
Stanford vs Utah would be 12 or 11 respectively for the PAC.
LikeLike
Assuming ND counts…
LikeLike
Starting in 2016.
LikeLike
The only PAC schools not playing a P5 school are WSU and Utah. They do play Boise St and BYU, respectively, which seem more than adequate substitutes. Several teams have multiple P5 OOC games a year in multiple upcoming years.
B1G going to nine games is a great move but let’s not pretend it vaults the conference to the top of the SOS list.
LikeLike
Richard says:
November 4, 2015 at 2:34 pm
Yep, you can’t ignore CCG’s.
Counting the CCG, a B10 champ will play a minimum of 11 P5 teams. The SEC, ACC, and Pac will play a minimum of 10 P5 teams. The B12 will play a minimum of 9 P5 teams.
While Kansas might technically count as a P5 for each of the B12 schools, it probably is -1 or -2 in the CFP ballot count.
LikeLike
Kind of like a couple of Big 10 teams, 2 or 3 ACC teams and sometimes Vanderbilt.
LikeLike
bullet,
“Kind of like a couple of Big 10 teams, 2 or 3 ACC teams and sometimes Vanderbilt.”
In many/most years yes, but not this year. KU is much worse than any other P5 team in 2015 (so far).
Here is a composite ranking of over 100 different polls and computer rankings:
http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm
The worst P5 schools:
80 Vandy
81. RU
83. UMD
85. SU
86. BC
89. CO
90. PU
91. WF
97. OrSU
118. KU
KU really is in a league of it’s own this season.
LikeLike
In 2016.
Compare Baylor’s 2016 schedule with OSU or MSU’s, for instance.
LikeLike
There are some long shot scenarios where Houston could slip in. But very long shot. Need to not have any 1 loss teams other than SEC/Big 12/Big conference champs.
LikeLike
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/view-rankings
The first official CFP rankings. I know we’ve all seen them, but just for completeness.
1. Clemson
2. LSU
3. OSU
4. AL
5. ND
6. Baylor
7. MSU
8. TCU
9. IA
10. UF
17. MI
21. NW
SEC – 6/14 (43%)
B12 – 4/10 (40%)
B10 – 5/14 (36%)
P12 – 3/12 (25%)
AAC – 3/12 (25%)
ACC – 2/14 (14%)
LikeLike
And the chaos started last night as #24 Toledo promptly lost to NIU. That all but gives the G5 NY6 slot to the AAC champ as well as strengthening resumes with W’s over NIU.
LikeLike
If 1 loss means elimination for the non P5’s. looks like just 2 remain
Houston best win may be at 4-4 Louisville so far
————————————————————————
Tennessee Tech (2-7) // W 52–24 // 30,479 // FCS win
@ Louisville (4-4) // W 34–31 // 50,019 // ACC win
Texas State (2-5) // W 59–14 // 35,257 // SUN win
@ Tulsa (4-4) // W 38–24 // 17,146
SMU (1-7) // W 49–28 // 25,204
@ Tulane (2-6) // W 42–7 // 21,522
@ UCF (0-9) // W 59–10 // 28,350
Vanderbilt (3-5) // W 34–0 // 29,565 // SEC win
Cincinnati (5-3)
Memphis (8-0)
@ Connecticut (4-5)
Navy (6-1)
.
…
.
Memphis best win is Mississippi so far
————————————————————————
Missouri State (1-7) // W 63–7 // 41,730 // FCS win
@ Kansas (0-8) // W 55–23 // 37,798 // B12 win
@ Bowling Green (7-2) // W 44–41 // 21,178 // MAC win
Cincinnati (5-3) // W 53–46 // 45,172
@ South Florida (4-4) // W 24–17 // 22,546
Ole Miss (7-2) // W 37–24 // 60,241 // SEC win
@ Tulsa (4-4) // W 66–42 // 20,216
Tulane (2-6) // W 41–13 // 30,381
Navy (6-1)
@ Houston (8-0)
@ Temple (7-1)
SMU (1-7)
If Memphis beats Houston, looks like they have the better SoS as Houston still has not beaten a team over .500 so far.
LikeLike
I’ve got to make a plug for my Appalachian State Mountaineers’ great start to the season so far.
– Their 7-1 start is the best in the Sun Belt’s 15-year history.
– Their only loss was at No. 1 and 8-0 Clemson.
– As of Week 8, they were the only team in the country in the top 20 in both offense and defense.
– They’re only in their second season at the FBS level, and it’s their first in which they’re bowl-eligible.
– They’re on the verge of signing a Home-and-Home with Miami (Hurricanes, not RedHawks), starting in September 2016 in Boone, not Miami. It would be by far the biggest name opponent ever to come to Boone.
Tonight on ESPNU is a home game against Arkansas State, who is also 4-0 in the Sun Belt Conference. Winner has the inside track to the conference championship. If App State wins, they will have an excellent shot at finishing 11-1 since the remaining teams on the schedule have losing records.
Look, I know none of this is going to generate the attention of the media or most fans of P5 teams. But this is an unbelievable start to my alma mater’s move into the FBS. Yes, the schedule has been week. The Sun Belt is pretty awful, especially this year, plus the non-conference games aside from Clemson turned out to be worse teams than we anticipated. But I don’t care. I never imagined the team doing this well in only year #2 in the FBS. We were the best FCS program of all over our final ten years at that level, but we were terrible in 2013 (3-8). To win against teams that have been playing at this level for much longer than we have is very gratifying.
I do not expect, nor would I suggest we’re deserving, that we will somehow make it into the New Year’s Six. Those AAC teams are far too deserving. Heck, between Houston, Navy, and Temple, Memphis is facing teams who are a combined 21-2 in three of their final four games, and that does account for the AACCG. (Yet their strength of schedule will get knocked. Ridiculous. But I digress.
I will be thrilled just to go to our first bowl game, even if it’s the GoDaddy. Provided we win tonight, at least we will face a quality team like Bowling Green or Toledo.
This is as exciting a time to be a fan and alum of App State as I could have imagined. Can’t wait to get tickets (hopefully the contract pans out) to next year’s Miami @ App State game, but first comes Arkansas State.
Thanks for reading.
LikeLike
Even in a weak conference, you’ve got to do a lot of things right to be 11-1. I think the future is looking up for Appalachian State.
LikeLike
Its called jinxing your team!
LikeLike
Lol. I don’t believe in that, but touché anyway. Still a fun season.
LikeLike
Purdue has decided to keep Hazell for a fourth season to avoid paying his $6.6M buyout. He’s 6-26 so far, but he’s guaranteed $2.2M per year and has 3 years left on his contract.
LikeLike
Yea. No way Mitch Daniels will pay that to someone so they do not have to work. He is a very frugal man.
LikeLike
I suspect PU fans would be more upset but the school did just commit to a $60M facility upgrade.
LikeLike
I think the fan base is definitely mixed. No one is happy, but the facility investment is encouraging. If we can beat Frank’s Illini this weekend we would have a two game winning streak in the B1G for the first time in what seems like 5 years. I guess by the strictest definition of the term, that’s progress. Big picture, I think nearly any ethical coach deserves 4 years. But next year needs to be 6 wins plus a bowl or I think he needs to go.
LikeLike
They might also have concluded they are way behind in the pecking order of available openings and decided to wait until a more opportune time – perhaps this time next season.
LikeLike
They might also have concluded they are way behind in the pecking order of available openings and decided to wait until a more opportune time – perhaps this time next season.
I cannot disprove your hypothesis, but I’ve never heard of that, as a reason to retain a coach you’d otherwise fire.
There’s an unusually high number of FBS openings right now, but they aren’t all after the same pool of candidates. Purdue is simply in a lower stratum than USC, Miami, or South Carolina.
On top of that, many of these jobs are filled regionally: UCF is probably going to want someone with proven recruiting success in the South, particularly Florida. Purdue is going to want someone who knows the midwest, and so forth.
Really, Illinois is the only open job right now that I’d consider Purdue’s direct competition. (I am not counting the Minnesota job as “open”, though it could eventually be. The interim guy says he wants it badly. I think they’ll give him a shot, as long as the team doesn’t totally unravel in the final month of the season. He came within inches of beating Michigan, which is not a bad start.)
LikeLike
Where does Maryland fit in your equation compared to other FBS openings? Probably behind Southern Cal, but not far away from Miami and South Carolina, and possibly ahead of Illinoois?
LikeLike
Here are the CFP rankings, with the Massey difference listed after record. I think the committee leaned on a computer ranking, or a compilation of them, and then tweaked it just a bit. While getting confused between TCU and Baylor. Then told Jeff Long to he had to go on television and explain it however he wanted.
1. Clemson (8-0) 0
2. LSU (7-0) +1
3. Ohio State (8-0) -1
4. Alabama (7-1) 0
5. Notre Dame (7-1) +1
6. Baylor (7-0) +4
7. Michigan State (8-0) 0
8. TCU (8-0) -3
9. Iowa (8-0) 0
10. Florida (7-1) -2
11. Stanford (7-1) 0
12. Utah (7-1) +2
13. Memphis (8-0) +2
14. Oklahoma State (8-0) -1
15. Oklahoma (7-1) -3
16. Florida State (7-1) +4
17. Michigan (6-2) -1
18. Ole Miss (7-2) -1
19. Texas A&M (6-2) +3
20. Mississippi State (6-2) +1
LikeLike
They are provided with many stats that aren’t made public (you can recreate some of them), and those might help explain things. I also don’t worry too much about the early rankings since OSU cam from #16 last year.
Much like last year, I think they do a terrible job explaining their rankings each week. They’d be much better off hiring a person to sit in the room and interview the 12 voters and then write up a brief explanation of what happened. Summarize the discussion of the teams, which factors various voters emphasize, how close the voting was for certain positions, etc. Put that person on TV to explain the weekly rankings.
LikeLike
They could do us all a favor and not put out rankings until mid November. I am so tired of the constant crap thrown out on the WWL re-rankings, that I am giving up on their sports talk shows. Thankfully, the dumbing down of the WWLs sports talk makes that easy to do.
LikeLike
They could do us all a favor and not put out rankings until mid November.
They clearly wouldn’t be doing us all a favor: the reason ESPN broadcasts that show, is because people watch it. And then debate it, as we are doing here.
I am so tired of the constant crap thrown out on the WWL re-rankings….
Then don’t watch.
LikeLike
Watch what…?
LikeLike
Gee, thanks Mark! What part of “I am giving up on their sports talk shows” don’t you understand?
LikeLike
Gee, thanks Mark! What part of “I am giving up on their sports talk shows” don’t you understand?
You said it would “do us ALL a favor,” which is obviously untrue. People are watching that show in large numbers, which is the main reason it exists. (I don’t watch it myself, but I can see why many do.)
LikeLike
largeR,
“They could do us all a favor and not put out rankings until mid November.”
They could just do the end of season rankings and skip the rest, but the weekly rankings and ranking shows make money for ESPN.
“I am so tired of the constant crap thrown out on the WWL re-rankings, that I am giving up on their sports talk shows. Thankfully, the dumbing down of the WWLs sports talk makes that easy to do.”
Nobody is forcing you to watch or listen to ESPN at all. I don’t.
LikeLike
They did delay it a couple of weeks this year. They should delay an extra couple next year.
LikeLike
They did delay it a couple of weeks this year. They should delay an extra couple next year.
I don’t watch the show, but the rankings are of some interest, and make competitive sense. In any race, you want to know where you stand.
LikeLike
They pushed it back 1 week because the season is 1 week shorter this year (double byes last year). Last year it started on 10/28 versus 11/3 this year (teams had played 7 or 8 games). They discussed it in the off season and have no interest in changing it. ESPN did speak up to say they want to have these shows to help them pay for the playoff.
LikeLike
I think the timing is fine, and really like how the AP poll takes its cues from the CFP rankings. No more tOSU is #1 nonsense, Big-12 #1 votes dried up, and generally more respect for teams that try to play tougher schedules (Alabama, ND, LSU).
LikeLike
Feels a bit like days gone bye.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/black-football-players-striking-at-missouri-in-protest-of-administration-032149647.html
LikeLike
Cut them all and replace them with walk-ons, transfers and new recruits. They can protest the school without harming their teammates. Their scholarships should be contingent on them actually practicing and playing unless injured, sick, etc.
That’s not to say the school doesn’t have racial issues that need fixing (I have no idea if they do or not).
LikeLike
Disagree. Not the same situation as “striking” for personal financial gain. Pinkel and the rest of the team are in support, and apparently the gov.
LikeLike
“They” are the “team”, if by team one means 1st and 2nd-stringers.
LikeLike
Lets say coach and admin are not with these players and they have enough bodies (most B16 teams probably would) to field a team.
Would real-world opponent BYU make the trip and play (probably the 1 team in the best position to dominate a suddenly small-rostered team like a Mizzou)?
If it were an SEC opponent , would their black players boycott – next question being does their coach honor that as did Pinkel (they have actually been exemplary on the Confederate Flag issue) or do they go through with an early 1960s-looking game?
LikeLike
I thought it was self evident that I meant basically the whole team, head coach included, not just the originally cited subset that was labeled by race. Are 3rd team, walkons, etc. not team members? Pic I saw seemed racially diverse and included far more than 30 something team members.
LikeLike
urbanleftbehind, Brian, etc.:
Keep in mind that Pinkel has to be in alignment with his players if he cares to be competitive in recruiting going forward. A school that went the hardline approach would pretty much be saying “we don’t care to be competitive in football in the near future”.
Don’t see why black players on an opposing team would boycott when the issue is perceived insensitivity of the Mizzou administration.
“We agree that your president should step down, ergo we will hurt our team/school/president”? That logic doesn’t follow.
LikeLike
Richard,
“urbanleftbehind, Brian, etc.:
Keep in mind that Pinkel has to be in alignment with his players if he cares to be competitive in recruiting going forward. A school that went the hardline approach would pretty much be saying “we don’t care to be competitive in football in the near future”.”
I’m well aware that Pinkel can’t do it. But either the AD or someone higher up should be the adult that holds the players to their contracts. It’s not a big deal if it’s 1 practice, but if they were willing to miss all week and a game, they’d be costing the school millions while breaking the contract for their FCOA.
It’s likely all over since the president quit anyway.
LikeLike
Pinkel has no choice but to “be in support” if he ever wants to recruit a black player again.
That said, what is the normal response to a player that voluntarily skips practice? How many does one get to skip while still getting free tuition? Can a player never actually attend a practice but still get his full ride?
LikeLike
That said, what is the normal response to a player that voluntarily skips practice? How many does one get to skip while still getting free tuition? Can a player never actually attend a practice but still get his full ride?
It’s just like any strike: the striking side’s leverage comes from strength in numbers. If one player decides to stop attending practice, he doesn’t have much leverage. If a big chunk of the team joins him, then suddenly the power shifts.
Just look at what they did. Within about 2 days, they managed to force out the president of the university. The problems had been percolating for a while, but if half the football team doesn’t go on strike, I think he’s still there today.
LikeLike
Marc:
I agree that without the FB action he’d probably be there today. But I doubt he’d have been in a week. We’re FB myopic at times and haven’t been aware the extent of the building pressure there until it interferes with our favorite pastime. Kind of a poor reflection in my mirror right now…
LikeLike
I’m probably going to write a post on this Mizzou situation since I find it to be an incredibly interesting hypothetical set of issues if the football players actually went through with sitting out, but there are two quick important points:
(1) The players are NOT under contract to play football or attend practices. Remember how the NCAA and its members fought tooth and nail to ensure that players couldn’t be paid as employees? Well, this is the flip side of it for the students. Their scholarship requirements are now effectively to (a) maintain academic eligibility and (b) not break any NCAA or school rules. They have to maintain a roster spot on the team, but that’s almost entirely within the discretion of the coach (who clearly supported the players here) outside of the violation of the aforementioned NCAA and school rules. These are NOT at-will employees and, as a result, you can’t apply employment law concepts to them. (sarcasm font) These students aren’t just here to play football, so we can’t pay them, remember? (/sarcasm font) So, outside of a coach’s decision or outright violation of a rule, the school can’t touch their scholarships.
(2) Plus, even if there was an employment-type relationship, remember that the University of Missouri is a public university, which means that it’s a government entity whose students have wide-ranging protection for free speech under the First Amendment. The government threatening to take away something of value to someone (such as a scholarship) in reaction to the exercise of free speech (and in this case, no less than political speech, which is exactly what the First Amendment was intended to protect), is considered to have a “chilling effect” that is a violation of the Constitutional rights of the student.
So, Mizzou was in a complete bind here from a legal perspective. That doesn’t even get into the practical issue of basically destroying the athletic department if they decided to rescind the scholarships of every single African-American player on their team. Just try recruiting top athletes in that type of environment. We’d have the irony of the competing SEC schools that had to be dragged kicking and screaming out of the segregation era telling all of the moms of recruits that they’re the racially sensitive schools compared to Mizzou. There was no way that Mizzou was going to do a single thing to those players. None. They had all of the legal, financial and practical leverage in this situation.
LikeLike
@ccrider55: I agree that, one way or another, he was probably not going to survive this. But can you think of any other set of 50-odd students who could have forced him out that fast? I sure can’t.
It’s not that I think the football team has a standing veto over who serves as president, but I can’t think of any other way this would have come to a head as quickly as it did. After all, the president’s failure was mainly that he had moved too slowly, not that he personally had supported racist behavior at the university.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“It’s just like any strike: the striking side’s leverage comes from strength in numbers.”
So as long as a bunch of them do it, the school should just roll over? And just as a note, it was roughly 30 players that said they would strike.
“Just look at what they did. Within about 2 days, they managed to force out the president of the university. The problems had been percolating for a while, but if half the football team doesn’t go on strike, I think he’s still there today.”
I think you are giving way too much credit to the FB team for this. I think a group of faculty staging a “teach in” had more impact. When both students and the faculty turn against you, you can’t do your job. I’m guessing he got pressure from above, too. The FB team brought more national exposure, but the local media had been covering this all along.
LikeLike
@Brian – I completely believe that the football team pushed this to the brink here. We see faculty complaints and resolutions all of the time (especially ones complaining about athletics) and the university leadership generally uses them for toilet paper. Mizzou was trapped on every single level. From a legal perspective, it couldn’t do anything to the students’ scholarships because that would (a) be a retaliatory First Amendment violation (since Mizzou is a government institution) and (b) destroy the argument that these aren’t employees that are just there to play football. From an overall athletic department perspective, Mizzou would lose over $1 million in a buyout of the BYU game just for next week in the short-term and, much more importantly, Mizzou would be completely curshed if they were blackballed by African-American athletes in the long-term.
The university didn’t give a crap that a student was starving himself. They also don’t give a crap if the faculty whines (as they know that they’re ivory tower types that are basically paid to whine). The football team basically having the ability to destroy your athletic department that’s cashing massive checks from the SEC and alums, however, is what completely turned this story on its head. You’re giving too little credit to the football team here – they showed that they held ALL of the power in this story.
LikeLike
Frank the Tank,
“(1) The players are NOT under contract to play football or attend practices.”
They are in layman’s terms.
“Their scholarship requirements are now effectively to (a) maintain academic eligibility and (b) not break any NCAA or school rules.”
Attending practices and playing in games if physically able are probably covered by school rules.
“They have to maintain a roster spot on the team, but that’s almost entirely within the discretion of the coach (who clearly supported the players here)”
1. The AD can always overrule the coach and is often the person to inflict official punishments for violating rules. Likewise, someone even higher up could do it.
2. The coach has to say that he supports the players. Without being a friend or family member of Pinkel there is no way to know what he really thinks about this.
“(2) Plus, even if there was an employment-type relationship, remember that the University of Missouri is a public university, which means that it’s a government entity whose students have wide-ranging protection for free speech under the First Amendment.”
That’s great, but not doing you “job” and expecting to still get paid isn’t free speech. The school isn’t forbidding them from speaking or even striking, just refusing to provide scholarship money to athletes that won’t participate. It would seem different if they were protesting their coach or AD this way.
“The government threatening to take away something of value to someone (such as a scholarship) in reaction to the exercise of free speech (and in this case, no less than political speech, which is exactly what the First Amendment was intended to protect), is considered to have a “chilling effect” that is a violation of the Constitutional rights of the student.”
Only if the legal system is idiotic (and it often is from an outsiders POV). Because it isn’t the direct connection you are implying. We’re not talking about kicking the students out, we’re talking about not literally giving them a free lunch if they won’t fulfill their athletic duties. Otherwise you are stating that all athletes at state schools can stop playing and demand the rest of their 4 years of a full ride (or their partial scholarship) anyway. No games means no ticket revenue and the breaking of all their TV deals, bankrupting the ADs as they have millions in debt to service. It also means no more training ground for future pro athletes and no more athletic scholarships ever for anyone.
“That doesn’t even get into the practical issue of basically destroying the athletic department if they decided to rescind the scholarships of every single African-American player on their team.”
It was roughly 30 players who said they would strike. That’s not all the non-white players on their team. I don’t know how many actually would have struck for any prolonged time.
LikeLike
@Brian – It’s not their “job”, though. The universities can’t have their cake and eat it, too – either the football players are employees and they can hire and fire them at will or pursuant to a union contract, or they have to be treated as students at-large and receive full protections.
Whether the legal system is idiotic isn’t relevant – this IS the legal system. Note that a disproportionate number of First Amendment cases are based upon public schools disciplining students based on some type of speech. This isn’t an accident because that’s the most common venue where a government entity has a lot of power to take direct actions against citizens. It doesn’t have to rise to the level of expulsion for a school to run into a ton of constitutional issues in disciplining students for exercising their free speech rights. We’ve seen cases where kids not being able to participate in an extra-curricular activity or attend a school dance be more than enough to provide the “chilling effect” to constitute a free speech violation. Removing a scholarship is VERY clearly in that category. Heck, if the school even merely *threatened* to take a scholarship away, then that would be enough to provide that type of chilling effect (as it’s a preemptive suppression of free speech).
Losing money isn’t a defense for a government entity to violate someone’s free speech rights. If Mizzou went into court trying to argue that football revenue interests trumped the First Amendment rights of their students, then they might as well just have the University of Missouri Foundation leave a blank check for each of those striking football players and have them fill in the amounts because it’s such a monumental legal loser. People in the South might be shocked to hear this, but federal courts actually give priority to the Bill of Rights over SEC football contracts and ticket sales!
As for the last point, even if we’re talking about “just” 30 players, let’s not understate the perception. Football coaches have thrown dirt at other schools in recruiting for issues that are a LOT less than seeing 30 African-American players getting their scholarships rescinded. Can you just imagine a coach recruiting against Mizzou and sitting down with the mother of an African-American recruit going forward? “Would you really want your son to go Columbia, ma’am?” Yikes.
LikeLike
Frank the Tank,
“It’s not their “job”, though. The universities can’t have their cake and eat it, too – either the football players are employees and they can hire and fire them at will or pursuant to a union contract, or they have to be treated as students at-large and receive full protections.”
Nor is cutting their full ride for failure to perform firing them. They are still students in school and can even be on the team if that’s what the school wants. They just aren’t getting a full ride in exchange for doing nothing.
“Whether the legal system is idiotic isn’t relevant – this IS the legal system.”
It sort of is, as the Supreme Court is renowned for tweaking the legal system via their decisions if they don’t like how things play out as is. Thus, the legal system is never a static thing and judges can make it almost anything they want.
“Note that a disproportionate number of First Amendment cases are based upon public schools disciplining students based on some type of speech.”
I’ll take your word for it.
“Removing a scholarship is VERY clearly in that category.”
Nothing is that clear when judges are involved.
“Losing money isn’t a defense for a government entity to violate someone’s free speech rights.”
I don’t care what any lawyer or judge says, that shouldn’t be a 1st Amendment violation. The students can speak all they want. But they also need to attend practice to earn a scholarship. This is just one more step down the pathway to forcing Congress to regulate the NCAA. This is exactly what so many people hate lawyers.
“As for the last point, even if we’re talking about “just” 30 players, let’s not understate the perception.”
I was just putting the number out there since people were talking about the entire team or all the minority players or whatever. Facts are good things.
LikeLike
???
You should care, because when it comes to the first admendment and laws, it’s what lawyers and judges say it is, not what your opinion is.
But whatev. Keep arguing against the lawyers on here.
Disregarding the legal aspect though (even though Frank seems to think that Mizzou would open themselves up to lawsuits), think through the ramifications if Mizzou took your hardline and cut the players.
How well will Mizzou revenue sports do going forward? What about going forward in recruiting.
Would Mizzou be competitive again in revenue sports any time in the near future?
So you know what you would lose by your action. What would you gain?
LikeLike
The most interesting question is who, what and when is next.
LikeLike
The journalism school has some backbone. There is a video of students and a professor confronting a photographer. The professor called for some “muscle” to force out another photographer.
http://journalism.missouri.edu/2015/11/dean-david-kurpius-comments-on-students-coverage-of-protest-on-carnahan-quad/
Columbia, Mo. (Nov. 10, 2015) — From the desk of David Kurpius, dean of the Missouri School of Journalism:
The Missouri School of Journalism is proud of photojournalism senior Tim Tai for how he handled himself during a protest on Carnahan Quad on the University of Missouri campus.
University of Missouri System President Tim Wolfe and University of Missouri-Columbia Chancellor R. Bowen Loftin both resigned on Nov. 9 after complaints and protests of their leadership. Tai was covering the event as a freelancer for ESPN when protesters blocked his access through physical and verbal intimidation.
The news media have First Amendment rights to cover public events. Tai handled himself professionally and with poise.
Also, for clarification, Assistant Professor Melissa Click, featured in several videos confronting journalists, is not a faculty member in the Missouri School of Journalism.
She is a member of the MU Department of Communication in the College of Arts and Science. In that capacity she holds a courtesy appointment with the School of Journalism. Journalism School faculty members are taking immediate action to review that appointment.
The events of Nov. 9 have raised numerous issues regarding the boundaries of the First Amendment. Although the attention on journalists has shifted the focus from the news of the day, it provides an opportunity to educate students and citizens about the role of a free press.
LikeLike
The journalism school is only doing what’s right.
Some of the demands and views of the the protesters are outlandish and it will backfire on them (collateral damage on the Democrats, their allies, in MO as well). A lot of people not thinking through the consequences of their actions/inactions or understanding power relationships on several sides.
LikeLike
Richard,
“You should care, because when it comes to the first admendment and laws, it’s what lawyers and judges say it is, not what your opinion is.”
That would only be true if I was invested in this situation and really cared about the outcome. I’m not and I don’t.
“Keep arguing against the lawyers on here.”
I’m not arguing against them, I’m arguing orthogonal to them. I’ve read/heard lawyers take different stances on this and I have no idea which, if any of them, are correct. I’m also not interested in that aspect of it.
“Disregarding the legal aspect though (even though Frank seems to think that Mizzou would open themselves up to lawsuits), think through the ramifications if Mizzou took your hardline and cut the players.”
Too bad that wasn’t my position. I said to cut their scholarships if they won’t practice and play, not cut them.
“How well will Mizzou revenue sports do going forward?
I don’t care.
“What about going forward in recruiting.”
I don’t care.
“Would Mizzou be competitive again in revenue sports any time in the near future?”
I don’t care.
“So you know what you would lose by your action. What would you gain?”
Immense satisfaction and a return to academics running a school and not athletics.
LikeLike
Brian:
So you will cut scholarships, which no one in the real world would do, because people in the real world care about ramifications, because it would give you satisfaction.
Anyway, I suppose, if you want to indulge in your dictatorship fantasies that are disconnected from the world we live in, feel free to go ahead. Just be sure to state from the beginning that you’re roleplaying a dictatorship fantasy rather than discussing real-world issues and ramifications. It would be easier to know what to skip.
LikeLike
http://www.wyohistory.org/essays/black-14-race-politics-religion-and-wyoming-football
LikeLike
“So you will cut scholarships, which no one in the real world would do,”
At least 1 person would.
“because people in the real world care about ramifications,”
I do, too. I just prioritize my ramifications differently than you do.
“because it would give you satisfaction.”
That’s part of it, sure.
“Anyway, I suppose, if you want to indulge in your dictatorship fantasies that are disconnected from the world we live in, feel free to go ahead. Just be sure to state from the beginning that you’re roleplaying a dictatorship fantasy rather than discussing real-world issues and ramifications. It would be easier to know what to skip.”
Many people have discussed the possibility of some schools dropping out of the major sports game as monetary and legal issues continue to change the landscape. This is no different.
LikeLike
Maybe you should investigate the issues being discussed before offering a comment like the one above….
LikeLike
I actually have read multiple stories about the “issues” there, but still don’t feel like I actually know if the school really has problems worse than anywhere else or if the students are whiners. Some of the complaints are pretty thin with outsized demands in terms of response. Other issues are much more worrisome.
But none of that is relevant to my opinion about the players striking. The get free tuition and more in exchange for playing. If they aren’t playing or practicing, they shouldn’t get their free rides.
LikeLike
You don’t seem to understand the power dynamics here. If the players don’t get their free rides, then Mizzou’s football program will effectively be destroyed. The players are exercising their leverage brilliantly.
LikeLike
Redwood86:
I understand what Brian is saying, and if it was only a FB and/or money issue then I completely agree with him. But, FB is only one of the methods (hunger strike being another, with really a more important a potential outcome) highlighting the actual issues. Any university that couldn’t weather the loss of a FB team for a game, or a season(s), doesn’t belong in the power conference side of things.
PS: just saw the chancellor is resigning, too.
LikeLike
Redwood86,
“You don’t seem to understand the power dynamics here.”
I understand it just fine, I just don’t agree with the weak willed approach to them. The students have exactly as much power as you give them.
“If the players don’t get their free rides, then Mizzou’s football program will effectively be destroyed.”
Says who? Not even all the minority players said they would strike. Giving in is letting the students run the school. At that point you don’t have a program anyway.
LikeLike
ccrider55,
“But, FB is only one of the methods (hunger strike being another, with really a more important a potential outcome) highlighting the actual issues.”
That kid is an idiot and I really wished they would’ve held out longer just so he’d suffer more from his own idiocy. If you want a real protest, then all transfer to other schools after the semester ends. Get the alumni to stop donating. Pressure companies to quit sponsoring research. None of that breaks existing contracts either.
“Any university that couldn’t weather the loss of a FB team for a game, or a season(s), doesn’t belong in the power conference side of things.”
They’d actually be breaking their contract with the SEC by not playing the game by choice. If it happens enough, the TV networks will complain about the conference not providing the promised inventory to choose from. It would essentially become a 13 team conference. How long is a school supposed to let the strike last? Until they get kicked out of the SEC?
LikeLike
Brian:
Have the SEC pull a page from the B12 playbook, and spin a raise out of the loss of inventory? 🙄 A theoretical advantage of a large conference: a single school is barely over 7%.
LikeLike
Brian: I’m not sure if you read Frank’s posts before you posted, but if you still think that the players had only the power that you give them (somehow ignoring that they can cost the school money and set Mizzou revenue sports back to the stone ages), I’m not sure what to say.
Hope you realize that when it comes to legal affairs, a layman’s understanding probably isn’t worth much.
LikeLike
Richard,
“I’m not sure if you read Frank’s posts before you posted,”
Depends on which posts of his and which of mine you’re referring to, I’d guess.
“but if you still think that the players had only the power that you give them”
I wasn’t referring to legal power at that time, just power/leverage/whatever you want to call it. If you cave in to a strike, you give the other side more power than they actually had and they can wield that power over many other issues. It’s better to drop sports than let the students run the school. Frankly, it’s better to close the school than let the students run it.
“Hope you realize that when it comes to legal affairs, a layman’s understanding probably isn’t worth much.”
I wasn’t trying to predict what our ridiculous legal system would do. It’s screwed up beyond repair.
LikeLike
Brian, I’m pretty certain that the people who actually run institutions won’t take your course of action. It’s why GM doesn’t just liquidate when the UAW strikes.
Thankfully, you’re not dictator of anything.
LikeLike
If you cave in to a strike, you give the other side more power than they actually had….
The strikers’ power is real, which is why strikes work. In this case the university president believed resigning was better than waiting out the strike or dealing harshly with the players — and it appears the president’s superiors (the board) thoroughly agreed.
It’s better to drop sports than let the students run the school. Frankly, it’s better to close the school than let the students run it.
The students are the main reason the school exists. They’re not an inconvenience to be swatted away.
The president himself conceded that the students had legitimate issues, and that he had been too slow to respond to them. The football team accelerated his departure, which probably had to happen anyway, but the university administration had already agreed that the protesting students were right.
LikeLike
Richard,
“Brian, I’m pretty certain that the people who actually run institutions won’t take your course of action. It’s why GM doesn’t just liquidate when the UAW strikes.”
Yes, that would never happen.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/strikes-shut-companies/story?id=17743234
Hostess Inc., the company that manufactures the sweet confections with the never-ending shelf life, is ceasing operations after striking employees refused to return to work by a company-imposed deadline. Hostess Inc., the company that manufactures the sweet confections with the never-ending shelf life, is ceasing operations after striking employees refused to return to work by a company-imposed deadline.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“The strikers’ power is real, which is why strikes work.”
Strikes are a game of chicken. The other side has as much power as you give them.
“In this case the university president believed resigning was better than waiting out the strike or dealing harshly with the players — and it appears the president’s superiors (the board) thoroughly agreed.”
Him resigning is completely different from the school tolerating a strike from the athletes. From the sounds of things, too many people were upset with him for him to be effective at his job anyway.
“The students are the main reason the school exists. They’re not an inconvenience to be swatted away.”
No, the education of the students is why the school exists.
“The president himself conceded that the students had legitimate issues, and that he had been too slow to respond to them.”
Of course he did. He was trying to cool things down for the next person. Was he supposed to call them entitled jackasses or something on his way out the door?
“The football team accelerated his departure, which probably had to happen anyway, but the university administration had already agreed that the protesting students were right.”
No, they agreed they have some legitimate complaints. That’s quite different from saying they were right.
LikeLike
Mizzou president just quit.
LikeLike
0 & 1 loss teams after 10 weeks and who picked up 2nd loss
________________________________________________
ACC 14.29% / 14 teams / 2 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 9-0 Clemson || @ Syracuse / vs Wake Forest / @ South Carolina
(1) | 8-1 North Carolina || vs Mami / @ Virginia Tech / @ NC State
(x) | Florida State picked up 2nd loss
B12 40.00% / 10 teams / 4 teams remain / NO CCG
(1) | 9-0 Oklahoma State || @ Iowa State / vs Baylor / vs Oklahoma
(1) | 8-0 Baylor || vs Oklahoma / @ Oklahoma State / @ TCU / vs Texas
(1) | 8-1 TCU || vs Kansas / @ Oklahoma / vs Baylor
(1) | 8-1 Oklahoma || @ Baylor / vs TCU / @ Oklahoma State
(x) | none this week
B1G 21.43% / 14 teams / 3 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 9-0 Ohio State || @ Illinois / vs Michigan State / @ Michigan
(1) | 9-0 Iowa || vs Minnesota / vs Purdue / @ Nebraska
(1) | 8-1 Michigan State || vs Maryland / @ Ohio State / vs Penn State
(x) | none this week
PAC 16.67% / 12 teams / 2 teams remain / CCG
(0) | last undefeated eliminated in Week 8
(1) | 8-1 Stanford || vs Oregon / vs California / vs Notre Dame
(1) | 8-1 Utah || @ Arizona / vs UCLA / vs Colorado
(x) | none this week
SEC 21.43% / 14 teams / 3 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 8-1 Alabama || @ Mississippi State / vs Charleston Southern / @ Auburn
(1) | 8-1 Florida || @ South Carolina / vs Florida Atlantic / vs Florida State
(1) | 7-1 LSU || vs Arkansas / @ Mississippi / vs Texas A&M
(x) | none this week
IND 33.33% / 3 teams / 1 team remains / NO CCG
(1) | 8-1 Notre Dame || vs Wake Forest / vs Boston College / @ Stanford
————————————————
AAC 8.33% / 12 teams / 1 team remains / CCG
(1) | 9-0 Houston || vs Memphis / @ Connecticut / vs Navy
(1) | 8-1 Memphis || probably eliminated in week 10
(1) | 8-1 Temple || probably eliminated in week 9
(1) | 7-1 Navy || probably eliminated in week 8
(x) | none this week
CUSA 0.00% / 13 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 10
MAC 0.00% / 13 teams / 0 remain / CCG
(1) | 7-1 Toledo || probably eliminated in week 10
MWC 0.00% / 12 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 7
SUN 0.00% / 11 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 10
.
…
.
Week 11 games – undefeated teams in BOLD
________________________________________________
ACC vs ACC
Miami (6-3, 3-2) @ North Carolina (8-1, 5-0)
Clemson (9-0, 6-0) @ Syracuse (3-6, 1-4)
B12 vs B12
Kansas (0-9, 0-6) @ TCU (8-1, 5-1)
Oklahoma State (9-0, 6-0) @ Iowa State (3-6, 2-4)
Oklahoma (8-1, 5-1) @ Baylor (8-0, 5-0)
B1G vs B1G
Ohio State (9-0, 5-0) @ Illinois (5-4, 2-3)
Maryland (2-7, 0-5) @ Michigan State (8-1, 4-1)
Minnesota (4-5, 1-4) @ Iowa (9-0, 5-0)
PAC vs PAC
Oregon (6-3, 4-2) @ Stanford (8-1, 7-0)
Utah (8-1, 5-1) @ Arizona (5-5, 2-5)
SEC vs SEC
Florida (8-1, 6-1) @ South Carolina (3-6, 1-6)
Alabama (8-1, 5-1) @ Mississippi State (7-2, 3-2)
Arkansas (5-4, 3-2) @ LSU (7-1, 4-1)
IND vs ACC
Wake Forest (3-6, 2-2) @ Notre Dame (8-1, 5-0)
————————————————
AAC vs AAC
Memphis (8-1, 4-1) @ Houston (9-0, 5-0)
LikeLike
The Movember Madness has begun.
Losers this week – #2, 7, 8, 13, 16, 18, 19, 24
1 possession wins – #9, #10, #21, #25
Division champs:
ACC A – Clemson
SEC E – UF
All but locked:
AAC E – Temple
P12 N – Stanford
Clear leaders:
ACC C – UNC
B10 W – IA
Leaders:
AAC W – UH/Navy
B10 E – OSU
B12 – OkSU/Baylor
P12 S – Utah
SEC W – AL
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches poll:
1. OSU
2. Clemson
3. Baylor
4. AL
5. OkSU +5
6. ND
7. Stanford
8. IA
9. LSU – 5
10. UF
12. TCU -9
14. MSU -8
16. MI
20. MS St +5
22. WI
24. NW +7
25. Memphis -9
B10 – 6/14 (43%)
B12 – 4/10 (40%)
AAC – 4/12 (33%)
SEC – 4/14 (29%)
P12 – 3/12 (25%)
ACC – 3/14 (21%)
LikeLike
CFP preview
P5 Contenders (0-1 losses, bold means undefeated) = 15:
ACC A – Clemson
ACC C – UNC
B10 E – OSU, MSU (play 11/21)
B10 W – IA
B12 – Baylor, OkSU,, TCU, OU (play all November)
P12 N – Stanford
P12 S – Utah
SEC E – UF
SEC W – LSU, AL
Other – ND
G5 contenders (0 losses) = 1:
AAC W – UH
LikeLike
Oops. Obviously Baylor and OkSU should be in bold.
LikeLike
Surprised you did not list MI. If they win out, they will likely be in the playoff. Or do you think the BiG will be shut out in that event?
LikeLike
Yes if Michigan wins the B1G they go to the Rose Bowl. USC also has no shot at the playoffs but if they win out they will be P12 champs and in the Rose Bowl. That will sink a 11-1 Utah since it is easier to bypass both than to explain why a team that could not even make their conference CCG should have one of 4 playoff spots. Same would go for a 12-1 Iowa CCG loser. A one loss B12 / P12 / ACC champion or Notre Dame will get in before a 2 loss Michigan. Even a two loss SEC champ will make it before a 2 loss B1G champ; just that much bias for the SEC.
LikeLike
USC has 2 conference losses. Winning out won’t pass Utah without a Utah stumble.
LikeLike
Correct; what I get for repeating ESPN (this comment was made in AZ-USC game) without checking it. Does not help a 2 loss MI making the playoff.
LikeLike
Surprised you did not list MI. If they win out, they will likely be in the playoff. Or do you think the BiG will be shut out in that event?
Michigan needs help to make the playoff. The Committee would likely choose an undefeated or one-loss P5 champ (or Notre Dame) over a 2-loss B1G champ.
Michigan would need to win out, and Michigan State would need to lose at least one more, and Notre Dame would need to lose at least one more, and multiple P5 leagues would need to crown 2-loss champions, before Michigan would have a real shot.
None of that is totally far fetched, but Michigan needs a lot of breaks to be a playoff team.
LikeLike
Redwood86,
“Surprised you did not list MI.”
Why? I clearly listed the criteria at the top of the list (0 or 1 loss).
“If they win out, they will likely be in the playoff.”
Not right now. There are too many other 0 and 1 loss teams. If enough another teams start to lose, I’ll open the list to 2-loss teams.
“Or do you think the BiG will be shut out in that event?”
Right now, yes. AL, Clemson, B12 champ, P12 champ and ND might all be ahead of them.
LikeLike
I think an 11-2 Michigan COULD get in over a 1 loss Big 12 champ. Look at this hypothetical resume for Michigan:
2 top 10-15 wins (OSU, Iowa), 2 top 25-30 wins (NW, BYU)
2 losses to top 20-25 teams (Utah, MSU), both of which were close. (Note: Utah would need to lose a game).
That would compare favorably with a 1 loss Big 12 champ, who by losing a game would only be able to produce 2 quality wins. The only exception would be Oklahoma, who might be able to produce 3 if Tennessee wins out (very likely), but the Sooners would have by far the worst loss of any playoff team (Texas, will probably not make a bowl).
LikeLike
Count me as another who thinks than a 11-2 UMich that is undisputed B10 champ with some impressive wins and tough schedule could get in over several B12 co-champs with the same number of wins and a less tough schedule.
Remember that the committee wants to reward tough OOC scheduling. If they pick Baylor with a joke OOC schedule over a UMich that challenged itself with Utah, what message would they send?
LikeLike
Baylor or OKSt., who also has a joke OOC schedule.
LikeLike
I think an 11-2 Michigan COULD get in over a 1 loss Big 12 champ. Look at this hypothetical resume for Michigan….
If the original poster had said that Michigan “could” make the playoff if they win out, I would’ve agreed. However, the OP said “likely“, and didn’t even stipulate the necessary conditions (i.e., all the Big XII leaders lose a game, Notre Dame loses, etc.).
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
AP poll:
1. Clemson
2. OSU
3. AL
4. Baylor
5. OkSU
6. ND
7. Stanford
8. IA
9. LSU -5
10. Utah
13. TCU -8
14. MSU -8
15. MI
22. Navy +15
23. WI
24. NW +5
25. Memphis -10
B10 – 6/14 (43%)
B12 – 4/10 (40%)
AAC – 4/12 (33%)
SEC – 4/14 (29%)
P12 – 3/12 (25%)
ACC – 3/14 (21%)
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jerry-palm/25366967/bowl-projections-upsets-of-top-ranked-teams-shuffle-playoffs-big-bowls
Jerry Palm projects all the bowls.
2 key notes:
* 4 5-7 teams are in it, all from the B10 (remember you need to a high APR to make it at 5-7)
* Navy can cause problems by winning the AAC but losing to Army
The Midshipmen are still unbeaten in league play and things get interesting if Navy wins the American Athletic Conference title. It still has a game to play after bowl selections are announced on Dec. 6. Navy could be selected to get the spot in a CFP Selection Committee game, then lose to Army. In that case, the committee is allowed to reevaluate its rankings and possibly give that spot to another team. In that scenario, two conference’s bowl lineups may not be firmly set until Dec. 12 or Dec. 13.
That differs slightly from what Brett McMurphy tweeted, but with thew same result.
LikeLike
Urban Meyer just coached his 50th game for OSU (177th overall).
Best 50 game starts at a I-A school ever:
Fielding Yost 49-0-1 (165-29-10 at UM 1901-1923, 1925-1926)
Gil Dobie 48-0-2 (58-0-3 at UW from 1908-1916)
Urban Meyer 47-3
Chris Petersen 46-4 (92-12 at Boise from 2006-2013)
Dennis Erickson 46-4 (63-9 at Miami from 1989-1994)
Best W% for a CFB coach
1. Kehres – 0.929 (Mt. Union)
2. Rockne – 0.881 (ND)
3. Leahy – 0.864 (BC, ND)
4. Reade – 0.862 (Augustana)
5. Perry – 0.855 (BGSU)
6. Meyer – 0.853 (BGSU, Utah, UF, OSU)
A win Saturday would get OSU 30 straight regular season conference game victories, a new NCAA record (tied with FSU at 29 now).
Even OSU fans didn’t expect this much success, and at least this one is grateful.
LikeLike
A lot of Buckeye fans don’t appreciate what an extraordinary string of coaches tOSU has had: Brown, Hayes, Bruce, Cooper, Tressel and now Meyer. Everyone of Meyer’s predecessors is in the College Football Hall of Fame, and Brown is in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
Meyer has a chance (as is chance) to become the greatest tOSU coach, surpassing even Woody.
LikeLike
bob sykes,
“A lot of Buckeye fans don’t appreciate what an extraordinary string of coaches tOSU has had: Brown, Hayes, Bruce, Cooper, Tressel and now Meyer.”
Doesn’t every school higher an unending string of future HoF coaches?
“Everyone of Meyer’s predecessors is in the College Football Hall of Fame, and Brown is in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.”
Well, technically all but Fickell.
“Meyer has a chance (as is chance) to become the greatest tOSU coach, surpassing even Woody.”
A greater overall coach, yes. It’d be really tough for him to surpass Woody at OSU though, mostly due to longevity.
Woody coached 276 games for OSU (Meyer just hit 50)
Woody won 13 B10 titles (Meyer has 1)
Woody won 5 NCs (Meyer has 1)
Overall, however, it’s a much closer comparison already:
238-72-10 vs 151-26 (0.656 vs 0.853)
13 vs 5
5 vs 3
LikeLike
I know you will call me a troll, but bragging about coaches whose careers ended in disgrace is a bit unseemly. Perhaps your attitude is why it recurs so often?
LikeLike
Redwood86,
“I know you will call me a troll,”
I hadn’t planned on it, but I will if it makes you feel better.
“but bragging about coaches whose careers ended in disgrace is a bit unseemly.”
Perhaps you should look again. I didn’t really brag about the other coaches, I talked about Meyer and Bob Sykes mentioned the string of HoF coaches OSU has had. I did concur that it’s been an extraordinary run, though.
I went on to explain why I didn’t think Meyer would surpass Woody to OSU fans, and I don’t think listing facts for comparison purposes is bragging.
I also don’t really much care what people think about OSU’s former coaches. Since 1947, every permanent head coach at OSU (so all HC but Fickell) has made the CFB HoF. That’s an objective criterion for declaring them to be great coaches. A couple had ignominious endings, but OSU fans (and many neutral ones) also remember all the good they did along the way. A career ending in disgrace isn’t the same as a disgraceful career, nor does it make them bad people.
LikeLike
I know you will call me a troll, but bragging about coaches whose careers ended in disgrace is a bit unseemly. Perhaps your attitude is why it recurs so often?
I’m a Michigan fan, but even I accept that the sad endings to the careers of Hayes and Tressel do not negate what they otherwise achieved.
LikeLike
Further evidence of the decline of Miami football
http://www.fbschedules.com/2015/11/miami-hurricanes-may-play-at-appalachian-state-2016/
The U is considering a home and home with Appalachian State. This is on top of upcoming H-H’s with Toledo, Arkansas St. and FIU (though FIU would still be in the city of Miami).
LikeLike
There’s a sentiment of many down there that they may well not get an invite into the “Big ACC” circa 2025 and they are OK with membership in a lesser (e.g. AAC) conference. I got a lot gruff on some boards for saying that Miami was turning into a mid-21st century Pitt (a period of NC contention, great local recruiting, but now down to lesser and “legacy” talent and lowered expectations), but I might be right.
LikeLike
Miami’s fan support is wide, but not very deep unless the Hurricanes are national title contenders. Florida State had a strong enough fanbase to avoid the ACC “bad football” stigma, but not a smaller, private school such as Miami — especially after it left the Orange Bowl for the Dolphins’ stadium. I’m not at all surprised it’s gone for home-and-homes with foes seemingly beneath their station.
LikeLike
Got to be a bad AD. Appalachian St.?????
Or are they just afraid to play AAC schools on the road?
LikeLike
Let’s see what happens if they ever make an inspiring head coach choice. The last several hires have been logical. I cannot question the hires. But they have not been inspiring.
Miami football and DePaul basketball are similar to me. Both programs did great when they could keep a lot of local talent home, but fell away when others could walk into Miami/Chicago and take out the very best. I suppose you also need someone who can evaluate talent too–just because a guy is the 3rd best back in Florida H.S. does not mean that he will better in college than the 5th best back in Florida H.S. as they all age. But building a wall around the local talent would be a great start.
In Miami’s defense, when Florida, FSU, and Miami were competing for Florida running back prospects, they could each get 2 of the top 10. Now, some of those kids are going to USF, UCF, the other Florida schools, SEC schools, ACC schools, and so on. If you get 1 out of 10, you better be right about the guy you pick.
I could see RichRod doing well in Miami. And given how Greg Schiano was able to persuade NJ talent to stay with Rutgers, that might not be a bad fit either. No idea who it would take for DePaul.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/11/10/navy-college-football-playoff-contingency-plan/75529652/
Bill Hancock released a memo about the Navy situation.
As you are aware, Navy’s victory over Memphis kindled interest in the CFP policy that the management committee adopted in June. We had advised folks of the policy at that time — that the pairings announcement could be delayed only to the extent necessary to allow the committee to consider how the result of the Army-Navy game might affect Army’s or Navy’s ranking.
Here is the information that the selection committee reviewed today.
Summary — If the committee believes the result of the Army-Navy game could affect Army’s or Navy’s ranking and therefore its place in the playoff or its selection as the group of five representative, only the pairings that affect Army and Navy would be delayed until after the Army-Navy game.
Business as usual on Sunday, December 6 — The committee will rank the teams 1-through-25 and will publicly issue those rankings on December 6 as usual. Army and Navy will be ranked according to their performances to date. If Army or Navy is not in contention for the playoff nor to be the “group of five” representative, the committee would announce all the bowl pairings.
Bowl pairings announcement December 6 — If Army or Navy is in contention to be the “group of five” representative, and not for the playoff, the committee would announce the following on December 6: (1) the top 25 rankings, (2) the semifinal pairings and bowl sites, (3) the pairing for one of the new year’s six bowl games—either Fiesta or Peach, and (4) one participant in the other new year’s six bowl game, holding the other spot in that game for the “group of five” representative. If Army or Navy is in contention for the playoff, the committee would not announce any bowl pairings December 6.
Committee meeting Saturday, December 12, if necessary — If Army or Navy is in contention, the selection committee would convene by teleconference Saturday evening, December 12, after conclusion of the Army-Navy game. At that time it would determine if it is necessary to revise a segment of its December 6 rankings relative to Army or Navy and, if necessary, it would revise the rankings accordingly. The committee plans to announce the results on ESPN Saturday night, December 12.
LikeLike
What a mess. They should just calculate the rankings under the assumption that both academies have a loss in that game (or at least not count it).
Why should they inconvenience other schools just because they want a weekend to themselves?
LikeLike
Army and Navy have more leverage than Texas and the old SWC. They went ahead and paired the NCAA tourney before the SWC championship game one of those years in the late 80s or early 90s. It possibly knocked Texas out of a spot if they had waited as Texas got upset.
LikeLike
Richard,
“What a mess. They should just calculate the rankings under the assumption that both academies have a loss in that game (or at least not count it).”
Or they could do what the hoops committee does and make two sets of rankings and bowl pairings – one for if Army wins and the other for if Navy wins.
“Why should they inconvenience other schools just because they want a weekend to themselves?”
I agree it’s annoying but nobody will force them to stop doing it because of who they are.
LikeLike
It may be just me, but I liked how the Army vs. Navy game was played on championship Saturday. It provided a nice lead in to the SEC championship game. I always watch that, so I often just tuned into Army vs. Navy beforehand.
I usually disconnect from college football following championship Saturday for at least two weeks until at least some of the better bowl games begin. I don’t think I’ll ever watch the Army vs, Navy game again as long as its played a week after the first weekend in December. I also don’t know if there’s a better option. You can’t play it on championship Saturday since Navy may be playing for the AAC title. You could move it to Thanksgiving weekend but then it would just be an afterthought to every other rivalry game that weekend.
LikeLike
Tom,
“I also don’t know if there’s a better option. You can’t play it on championship Saturday since Navy may be playing for the AAC title. You could move it to Thanksgiving weekend but then it would just be an afterthought to every other rivalry game that weekend.”
What about on Thanksgiving (very few CFB games)? It could be the game you flip to when the Lions or Cowboys are getting blown out.
LikeLike
That could work.
LikeLike
“Why should they inconvenience other schools just because they want a weekend to themselves?”
Who is “they” here? I’m sure Army and Navy LIKE having the weekend to themselves, but the “they” here is primarily CBS Sports, but also the main sponsor USAA.
LikeLike
No, Army and Navy insist on playing that weekend. CBS is happy to do it but the academies have demanded it.
LikeLike
Coudnt you just do the pairings on the Sunday following the CCG for all except 2 bowls – the open slot Peach (for example) for a victorious Navy and a secondary bowl that would be typically the host of the #1 AAC MWC, MAC, CUSA, SB. If Navy loses, Navy gets a spot in the “champion bowl” of the now-#1 G5 team. It would also add the cliche scene of a bunch of players from say Houston watching the Army-Navy game to see if Navy loses.
LikeLike
But if the other contender among Go5 champions is the MAC champion, the MAC champion going to the NY6 would seem likely to reshuffle everything. If we could be sure that a bowl against a P5 school had an open slot, that might work … but we can’t be sure of that for any GIVEN P5 bowl, not until the end of Rivalry Week at the earliest, which would be quite late for being able to decide how to cope with the possibility of a Navy Go5 champion with a rivalry game still to play.
LikeLike
“the MAC champion going to the NY6 would seem likely to reshuffle everything” … among the MAC bowls, that is. Unless the MAC champion was slotted in to go somewhere other than the existing MAC tie-ins.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25369504/army-navy-result-will-not-affect-notre-dames-spot-in-playoff
An interesting follow-up note. The outcome of the Army-Navy game will not be considered for ND or any other team that played one of them. So ND could get in the top 4 based on an inflated SOS if Navy ends up losing to Army.
LikeLike
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/view-rankings#week-10
CFP rankings:
1. Clemson
2. AL
3. OSU
4. ND
5. IA
6. Baylor
7. Stanford
8. OkSU – lowest undefeated P5 team
9. LSU
10 Utah
B10:
13. MSU
14. MI – highest 2 loss team
18. NW
25. WI
AAC (battle for the G5 spot):
20. Navy
21. Memphis
22. Temple
24. UH
Others of note:
11. UF – SEC E champ
15. TCU – lowest 1 loss P5 team among the top group
23. UNC – ACC A leader, lowest 1 loss P5 team
B10 – 6/14 (43%)
B12 – 4/10 (40%)
AAC – 4/12 (33%)
SEC – 4/14 (29%)
P12 – 3/12 (25%)
ACC – 3/14 (21%)
General impressions:
* The B12 is still getting punished for SOS – the next few weeks will remedy that
* Beating IN bumped IA up that much?
* Still seems an odd mixture of objective success and the eye test to me
LikeLike
I thought Iowa deserved better than last week. But tomorrow is another day. They throw everything out and decide squeaking by IU rates a 5 slot jump.
It really makes them look ridiculous. Basically, they probably didn’t pay any attention to Iowa last week and didn’t notice their schedule wasn’t that bad. And they are punishing Baylor for their schedule and Oklahoma St. for the referee gifts that gave them the KSU and UT games.
LikeLike
Well, the USAToday composite of computer polls has Iowa at #6 (up 2 from #8). Baylor at #8. OKSt. at #5.
LikeLike
The top 4 of the CFP also match the top 4 of the computer composite exactly: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/rankings/2015/11/09/college-football-computer-composite-ranking-clemson-ohio-state-alabama/75439696/
LikeLike
I thought Iowa deserved better than last week. But tomorrow is another day. They throw everything out and decide squeaking by IU rates a 5 slot jump.
Iowa jumped four spots (9th to 5th). Losses by three teams above them account for a big part of that (LSU, Michigan State, TCU). You could argue that the Committee over-penalized LSU for losing to the #2 team, but there’s at least a logic to that.
But swapping Iowa and Baylor makes no sense. If they believed Baylor was better than Iowa last week, there was no new information that would justify re-ordering them. They both beat a bad opponent on the road by 7-8 points.
It really makes them look ridiculous. Basically, they probably didn’t pay any attention to Iowa last week and didn’t notice their schedule wasn’t that bad.
Yes, it does make them look ridiculous.
And they are punishing Baylor for their schedule and Oklahoma St. for the referee gifts that gave them the KSU and UT games.
Baylor should be punished for that schedule. It’ll get stronger in the next few weeks, but just like last year, they probably have no shot at the top four if they lose a game.
Oklahoma State has also played a very weak schedule. Their non-conference slate is even more of a joke than Baylor’s. However, they should get more credit for taking down TCU.
LikeLike
Unbeaten teams strength of schedule per Sagarin:
Clemson 27
Iowa 56
Oklahoma St. 61
Ohio St. 68
Baylor 89
Houston 118
So why is Ohio St. so high?
The Massey composite has Oklahoma St. #5. Iowa is #9. Houston is #19, 5 spots higher than the CFP Committee ranking.
LikeLike
UNC ranking is absurd. How can they be behind FSU and Temple? Who has FSU beaten compared to UNC? And does beating Penn State (Temple) really trump beating Pitt?
LikeLike
Missouri protest based on lies?:
http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/is-the-entire-mizzou-protest-based-on-lies-111115
Interesting questions raised. Now-warning-they ARE being raised by Clay Travis, so don’t leave your skepticism at the door.
LikeLike
Flipping around the other day, I saw the “I hate Clay Travis” segment on Fox. So maybe he is looking for material.
Or maybe he’s right?
LikeLike
I have no idea if he’s right, but a lot (if not all) of the initial claims were purely anecdotal with no witnesses. Importantly, most of the claims had no way to tell if the offending person was actually a MO student or someone else. And some of the anger was based on Ferguson, which is clearly not the president’s fault.
LikeLike
http://www.gophersports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/111115aab.html
MN made Tracy Claeys their permanent HC today with a 3 year deal. The current AD is also an interim guy, so the next one will have a little time to evaluate Claeys and decide whether to retain him beyond that.
I think the continuity will be very helpful for MN, but I wonder if they’ll catch some heat for not interviewing any other candidates, especially minority coaches.
LikeLike
I wonder if they’ll catch some heat for not interviewing any other candidates, especially minority coaches.
You don’t usually catch heat for removing an interim tag, from a guy who is already in the position and perceived to be doing a good job.
LikeLike
Not from fans, but you sometimes do from groups like the BCA.
LikeLike
The retention of Hazell at Purdue and openings at Maryland and possibly Rutgers may have made Minny’s choice a lot less pensive.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10467085/future-bca-uncertain
It may also be impacted by the BCA basically dying last year.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/25369203/playoff-playbill-ranking-week-11s-5-biggest-games-in-the-cfp-race
This week’s 5 most important games for the CFP.
1. #2 AL @ #17 MsSU
2. #12 OU @ #6 Baylor
3. OR @ #7 Stanford
4. #11 UF @ SC
5. Miami @ #23 UNC
Five more games to keep an eye on: No. 1 Clemson at Syracuse; No. 3 Ohio State at Illinois; Minnesota at No. 5 Iowa; Arkansas at No. 9 LSU; No. 10 Utah at Arizona.
LikeLike
Highest probability of “upset” (IMO):
1. Oklahoma @ Baylor
2. Florida @ South Carolina
3. Minnesota @ Iowa
4. Arkansas @ LSU
5. tOSU @ Illinois
LikeLike
Oops. I meant to put Alabama @ Miss. St #4.
LikeLike
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/just-win-baby-and-youll-probably-make-the-college-football-playoff/#ss-6
538 analyzes the chances of teams making the playoff and how they’d do in it.
LikeLike
FiveThirtyEight thinks that an undefeated Clemson, undefeated B12 champ, 1-loss or less SEC champ, 1-loss or less B10 champ, and the Stanford/ND winner if they don’t lose any more are likely in.
So they don’t seem to think that all 5 occurring is very high probability.
LikeLike
Richard,
“FiveThirtyEight thinks that an undefeated Clemson, undefeated B12 champ, 1-loss or less SEC champ, 1-loss or less B10 champ, and the Stanford/ND winner if they don’t lose any more are likely in.
So they don’t seem to think that all 5 occurring is very high probability.”
Do you think all 5 happening are likely?
13-0 Clemson is pretty likely
12-1 AL/UF looks pretty likely right now
13-0 or 12-1 OSU/MSU/IA looks very likely
12-0 B12 champ is iffy to me (all their tough games so close together)
ND has 1 tough game left while Stanford has at least 2. I could see Stanford beating ND but losing to Utah or OR.
538 chances for making the playoff:
ACC – 97%
B10 – 91%
B12 – 83%
SEC – 79%
P12 – 39%
ND – 30%
Clemson – 67%
OSU – 57%
AL – 42%
Baylor – 32%
ND – 30%
LikeLike
Brian, where are you getting your conference percentages?
On the 538 site (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/updated-college-football-playoff-odds-november-10/) they have the cumulative percentages of OSU/Iowa/MSU/UMich making the playoffs at 95%
They have the cumulative percentages of Clemson/UNC making the playoffs at 71%.
‘Bama/UF/LSU/MSSt. add up to 75%.
Baylor/OKSt./OU/TCU add up to 81%.
Stanford/UtahUCLA/USC add up to 43%.
In any case, yes, I believe it’s unlikely that all 5 events I listed will happen.
LikeLike
Richard,
“Brian, where are you getting your conference percentages?”
I used the article I linked (came out before Tuesday’s rankings). I believe you’re using their most recent one (came out after those rankings). The numbers did change a little between them.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/126829/grapple-on-the-gridiron-iowa-readies-for-unique-saturday-twinbill
Iowa is looking to crush the NCAA wrestling dual meet attendance record this weekend with a match-up versus OkSU at Kinnick before playing MN.
Iowa, as of Thursday morning, had sold 35,431 tickets to the wrestling event, on track for smashing success in its bid to the break the NCAA dual-meet attendance record of 15,996 set by Penn State in 2013.
LikeLike
I wonder when the B10 and other leagues with TV channels will start sponsoring esports. Like Ultimate frisbee or badminton, it wouldn’t be regulated by the NCAA. Unlike Ultimate frisbee or badminton, it’s already played and watched by a ton of people in the US who are willing to spend serious money on it.
And it has probably the most attractive demographic for advertisers: young males from above-average socioeconomic strata and with disposable income (who generally can’t be reached through advertising of traditional sports).
LikeLike
And it probably has the highest growth rate of any sport.
LikeLike
Prayers, first and foremost, but also another HC opening – http://deadspin.com/missouri-football-coach-gary-pinkel-announces-resignati-1742430041
LikeLike
Apparently he decided to retire on 10/27 but just chose today to announce it. Odd timing.
Did this influence his support for his players potentially striking?
LikeLike
http://www.albanyherald.com/news/2015/nov/10/georgia-tech-may-could-be-bowl-eligible-at-5-7/
The experts are predicting not enough 0.500 or better teams to fill all 80 bowl slots. That means 5-7 teams will get in. For that to happen, the top 5 schools in APR from the 5-7 list will form a pool for the bowls to choose from.
Among teams that could finish 5-7, [Georgia] Tech’s APR score is seventh, followed by Virginia Tech at eighth. That includes Army (2-7) and Boston College (3-7), both of whom would need to win out to reach 5-7. The others ahead of the Jackets are Utah State (5-4), Nebraska (4-6), Vanderbilt (3-6) and Rutgers (3-6).
LikeLike
UNL may yet keep their bowl streak alive.
Nothing says Husker football like a trip to the Quick Lane Bowl in snowy Detroit.
LikeLike
It’s going to be a tough week for the pollsters and CFP committee.
With #10 Utah and #19 UCLA still playing:
Comfortable Ws – #2 AL, #3 OSU, #4 ND, #13 MSU, #16 FSU, #20 Navy, #22 UNC
Close Ws – #1 Clemson, #5 IA, #8 OkSU, #11 UF, #12 OU, #14 MI, #15 TCU, #18 NW, #24 UH
Ls – #6 Baylor, #7 Stanford, #9 LSU, #21 Memphis, #22 Temple
The P12 may be out of the playoff unless Utah wins it and MI wins the B10.
OkSU is the lone undefeated left in the B12, but they host Baylor and OU the next 2 weeks. Will an 11-1 B12 team make the playoff, and if so which one?
UH is still out there as an undefeated but has Navy in 2 weeks.
MSU at OSU is confirmed for 3:30 on ABC next Saturday.
LikeLike
Stanford fired off a cannon when Oregon denied Stanford the 2-point conversion to win the game?
That was hilarious.
Also, Stanford Stadium was cheering the result of that play, it seemed.
LikeLike
No lose game for Phil Knight. His MBA is from Stanford, but he owns his undergrad school.
LikeLike
http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
Coaches poll:
1. Clemson
2. OSU
3. AL
4. OkSU
5. ND
6. IA
7. OU
8. UF
9. MSU +5
10. Baylor
Others of note:
12. UNC +5
13. MI
14. UH
15. Stanford -8
17. LSU -8
18. Utah -5
19. Navy
20. WI
21. NW
22. OR +7
23. WSU +7
25. MsSU -5
B10 – 6/14 (43%)
P12 – 5/12 (42%)
B12 – 4/10 (40%)
SEC – 5/14 (36%)
ACC – 3/14 (21%)
AAC – 2/12 (17%)
The P12 is most likely out of the playoff with Stanford and Utah both losing. That leaves the other 4 P5 champs and ND for the 4 spots. If enough teams lose, a 13-0 UH could sneak in. I’m not sure why a 28-3 win @ IL cost OSU the top spot when compared to Clemson winning 37-27 @ Syracuse.
LikeLike
CFP preview
P5 Contenders (0-1 losses, bold means undefeated) = 12:
ACC A – Clemson
ACC C – UNC
B10 E – OSU, MSU (play 11/21)
B10 W – IA
B12 – OkSU, Baylor, TCU, OU
SEC E – UF
SEC W – AL
Other – ND
G5 contenders (0 losses) = 1:
AAC W – UH
LikeLike
ND ranked ahead of Iowa is ridiculous. Forget about who they lost to. Just compare who they have beaten.
LikeLike
Richard,
“ND ranked ahead of Iowa is ridiculous. Forget about who they lost to. Just compare who they have beaten.”
I don’t know.
ND: 5 easy Ws, 4 good Ws
1-8 UMass
3-7 WF, UVA, GT
4-6 Texas
7-3 USC, Pitt
8-2 Temple
8-1 Navy
10-0 Clemson (L)
IA: 7 easy Ws, 3 good Ws
#6 FCS
1-9 UNT
2-8 UMD
3-7 ISU
4-6 IN, MN
5-5 IL
7-3 Pitt
8-2 NW, WI
I’d give ND an edge on the wins, personally. On the other hand, ND has a loss that IA lacks so I’d put IA higher.
LikeLike
I’d say both Wisconsin and NU are better teams than Temple and Navy.
OK, USC may be better than Minny by a little.
LikeLike
Georgia Tech and Texas have the talent to beat anyone, even though they rarely do this year.
LikeLike
Michigan under Hoke last year had the talent to beat almost anyone, but that didn’t mean that they were a good team last year.
LikeLike
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
AP poll:
1. Clemson
2. OSU
3. AL
4. OkSU
5. ND
6. IA
7. OU
8. UF
9. MSU
10. Baylor
12. UNC +5
13. UH
14. MI
14. Stanford -8
17. LSU -8
18. Utah -8
19. Navy
20. NW
21. WI
24. WSU +8
B10 – 6/14 (43%)
P12 – 5/12 (42%)
B12 – 4/10 (40%)
SEC – 4/14 (29%)
ACC – 3/14 (21%)
AAC – 2/12 (17%)
LikeLike
http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/11/15/pac-12-college-football-playoff-oregon-stanford
A writer argues that the P12 needs to drop to an 8 game schedule if they want to make the playoff regularly, thinking an 8 game schedule with a requirement to play 1 P5 team OOC would make a big difference.
But the talk about the nine-game conference schedule problem has been bubbling for awhile, especially as the league has improved top to bottom. It’s easier for the Big 12 to play a nine-game conference schedule as it lacks a league title game to tack on another loss to one team’s playoff résumé. It’s easy for the Big Ten to move to a nine-game schedule, as it will do next year, because, well, who is really going to be scared year in and year out of teams like Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers? The Pac-12 isn’t the Big Ten. Scott touts his league as the best and deepest in the country. At the beginning of each season, we wonder aloud if the Pac-12 is finally ready to overtake the SEC.
Right. Because the P12 has no weak teams. Rutgers 37 – WSU 34 must be a figment of my imagination. OrSU and CO are powerhouses. UW is a borderline playoff team.
I think it’ll help the P12 out when the B10 and B12 both have 9 games and a CCG. Still, it’s hard to train people to value a tough schedule with more losses over a better record with an easier schedule.
LikeLike
Right. Because the P12 has no weak teams. Rutgers 37 – WSU 34 must be a figment of my imagination. OrSU and CO are powerhouses. UW is a borderline playoff team.
According to this list, the Pac-12 has six teams in the top 25 strength of schedule (USC, Washington, Utah, Cal, Oregon Stanford), and the Big Ten has zero.
So there is some validity to the writer’s premise—at least as this season has played out so far. Is one partial season’s worth of data is enough to draw that conclusion? I would say, probably not.
LikeLike
Marc Shepherd,
“According to this list, the Pac-12 has six teams in the top 25 strength of schedule (USC, Washington, Utah, Cal, Oregon Stanford), and the Big Ten has zero.”
1. The article was about their conference schedule. Since that list isn’t, it’s not entirely relevant.
2. By your list the SEC plays even tougher schedules (9 top 25) and they only have 8 conference games. Going to 8 isn’t a fix for the hard schedule problem by that measure.
3. Evaluating SOS before the season ends is problematic. The last 2-3 games can have a huge impact on it (many/most versions of SOS only consider teams already played).
“So there is some validity to the writer’s premise—at least as this season has played out so far.”
To the premise that dropping to 8 games would help them make the playoff? Maybe. SOS is an important part of being selected and we know weak SOS hurt the B12 last year. We’ve never really seen 2 losses with a high SOS compared to 1 loss with a weak SOS by the committee. We did see 12-1 with a tough SOS outrank 13-0 though. Besides, SOS wasn’t why the P12 went to 9 games nor why the B10 is going to 9. Until they find a way to draw more fans for 8 games versus 9, the P12 will stick with 9.
“Is one partial season’s worth of data is enough to draw that conclusion? I would say, probably not.”
Definitely not.
LikeLike
The solution is to make winning a Power-5 conference championship a prerequisite to making the playoff. That means there will only be 5 candidates + potentially ND/BYU for 4 spots each year.
I am not sure how to deal with ND/BYU. One way would be to compare how they do in their P5 games. For example, if ND beats USC & Stanford this year then they should get the nod ahead of a Pac-12 champ. If the Irish win all of their ACC games, then potentially they get the nod over the ACC champ, and certainly if they have beaten the ACC Champ. Another (very unlikely) way would be to tell ND to join a conference or be excluded.
LikeLike
Let it be a comparison ND v ACC champ for a conference champ spot. They both want the benefit of pseudo membership. Why disadvantage the other conferences? Treat ND as members. BYU, Boise St, etc have to displace two power conf champs to get in, not two plus ND.
LikeLike
The solution is to make winning a Power-5 conference championship a prerequisite to making the playoff. That means there will only be 5 candidates + potentially ND/BYU for 4 spots each year.
Before we look for a “solution,” perhaps we ought to ask whether there is a “problem”? So far, we’ve had only one year of the playoff, and all four teams were conference champions. I suspect that will usually be the case.
I could imagine a year where a couple of Power 5 conferences crown really weak champions, and the fourth-best team in the country is actually a second-place team in a strong league. I don’t mind if that happens occasionally.
I recall a year when UCLA could have won the Pac-12 with a 7-6 record. It didn’t happen, but could have. I don’t see any reason why the Bruins in that situation would deserve automatic priority over an 11-1 team that didn’t win its conference.
LikeLike
“Right. Because the P12 has no weak teams. Rutgers 37 – WSU 34 must be a figment of my imagination.”
Yes, it is (WSU 37 – Rutgers 34). But your point is made anyway.
LikeLike
Yes, that’s all my fault. I completely misread it when I looked at their schedule quickly.
But it still makes the point as RU is 1-6 in B10 play while WSU is 5-2.
LikeLike
Right, poor argument. This Schnell person seems ignorant.
By F/+ (as of last week), ASU, Arizona, Colorado, Oregon St. are all worse than IU.
Granted, so are Minny, UMD, PU, and RU, but the bottom of the P12 isn’t exactly strong.
Also 4 B10 teams vs. 3 Pac teams in the top 20 by F/+.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fplus
LikeLike
ASU would very likely beat IU. UofA has been beset by injuries. CO might beat IU.
LikeLike
Richard,
“Right, poor argument.”
Exactly. You can make decent arguments for the P12 dropping to 8 games to improve their playoff odds, but she chose a poor one. She also should’ve discussed the ADs wanting the 9 games for ticket sales and making sure everyone played in CA enough. Is making the playoff more often worth dropping those other 2 goals?
LikeLike
Plus 3B $ tv contract wasn’t for 12 tomato cans replacing conference match ups. I’m pretty sure ESPN and Fox would object.
LikeLike
While the Big Ten had other good reasons to move to 9, there’s also the fact that they were in the position when they made the decision of taking their media contract to market in the fairly near term future. And that would have weighed even more heavily in the AD agreement to stop scheduling FCS schools.
LikeLike
The answer is “No!” Pac-12 is bringing others to its perspective, not vice-versa. Eventually, the SEC will move to 9 as well.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t hold your breath on the SEC, but the B10 is going to 9 next year and the B12 will soon add a CCG I think. After that, I think the ACC might be next to do it. The SEC won’t try it unless they get shut out of the playoff a time or two for a weak SOS.
LikeLike
I don’t see the ACC doing it so long as they play ND every third year.
In those years, Clemson, FSU, GTech, and Louisville can’t play their traditional in-state as well as ND and have 7 home games unless they only have 8 conference games.
And while GTech and Louisville may be fine with 6 home and 6 away games, I don’t see FSU springing for it. I really don’t see Clemson going for that. Plus, Clemson and FSU wouldn’t have any other major OOC game besides the traditional rival.
That’s why I don’t see the SEC going to 9 conference games any time soon either.
LikeLike
I agree that neither is likely to do it soon. I just think the ACC is in the weaker position and thus more likely to make the change first. Perhaps ND will join totally. Perhaps the ACC will count the ND games as ACC games. Perhaps the season will reach 13 games.
LikeLike
I don’t think that will motivate them. A new TV contract would, but I don’t really see that coming.
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/general/writer/jerry-palm/25353577/college-football-2015-bowl-eligibility-tracker-41-teams-have-qualified
Bowl eligibility tracker with the 5 win teams listed in order of APR. 62 teams are eligible already for the 80 slots with a projection for 79 getting to 6 wins.
LikeLike
Almost certainly 63 with 6 from the MAC, since 5-5 Buffalo and Akron play next week, so they would have to draw after overtime to avoid having one of those two gaining eligibility next week.
And both of those would be favored in their final game of the season, while CMU would be favored in each of its next two games, so likely 7-8 bowl eligible schools from the MAC.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/120412/pure-confusion-ncaa-schools-bowls-not-sure-how-to-deal-with-5-7-teams
And now another complication – the NCAA reads the rule about 5-7 teams getting chosen based on APR differently than the conferences do. The NCAA thinks the rule says only the top 5 APR schools could be chose, period, and all 5 of them already have 6 wins. The conferences think it’s the top 5 5-7 schools. Later this year the NCAA and conferences are supposed to meet and figure out how the process would work, how bowls would choose teams, etc.
LikeLike
0 & 1 loss teams after 11 weeks and who picked up 2nd loss
________________________________________________
ACC 14.29% / 14 teams / 2 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 10 – 0 Clemson || vs Wake Forest / @ South Carolina
(1) | 9 – 1 North Carolina || @ Virginia Tech / @ NC State
(x) | none this week
B12 40.00% / 10 teams / 4 teams remain / NO CCG
(1) | 10 – 0 Oklahoma State || vs Baylor / vs Oklahoma
(1) | 9 – 1 Oklahoma || @ Baylor / vs TCU / @ Oklahoma State
(1) | 9 – 1 TCU || @ Oklahoma / vs Baylor
(1) | 8 – 1 Baylor || @ Oklahoma State / @ TCU / vs Texas
(x) | none this week
B1G 21.43% / 14 teams / 3 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 10 – 0 Ohio State || vs Michigan State / @ Michigan
(1) | 10 – 0 Iowa || vs Purdue / @ Nebraska
(1) | 9 – 1 Michigan State || @ Ohio State / vs Penn State
(x) | none this week
PAC 00.00% / 12 teams / 0 teams remain / CCG
(0) | last undefeated eliminated in Week 8
(0) | last 1 loss eliminated in Week 11
(x) | Stanford and Utah picked up 2nd loss this week
SECC 14.29% / 14 teams / 2 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 8 – 1 Alabama || vs Charleston Southern / @ Auburn
(1) | 8 – 1 Florida || vs Florida Atlantic / vs Florida State
(x) | LSU picked up 2nd loss this week
IND 33.33% / 3 teams / 1 team remains / NO CCG
(1) | 9 – 1 Notre Dame || vs Boston College / @ Stanford
————————————————
AAC 8.33% / 12 teams / 1 team remains / CCG
(1) | 10 – 0 Houston || @ Connecticut / vs Navy
(1) | 8 – 1 Navy || probably eliminated in week 8
(x) | Memphis and Temple picked up 2nd loss this week
MAC 0.00% / 13 teams / 0 remain / CCG
(1) | 8 – 1 Toledo || probably eliminated in week 10
CUSA 0.00% / 13 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 10
SUN 0.00% / 11 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 10
MWC 0.00% / 12 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 7
.
…
.
Week 12 games – undefeated teams in BOLD
________________________________________________
ACC vs ACC
North Carolina (9-1, 6-0) @ Virginia Tech (5-5, 3-3)
Wake Forest (3-7, 1-5) @ Clemson (10-0, 7-0)
B12 vs B12
Baylor (8-1, 5-1) @ Oklahoma State (10-0, 7-0)
TCU (9-1, 6-1) @ Oklahoma (9-1, 6-1) || elimination game for 1
B1G vs B1G
Ohio State (10-0, 6-0) @ Michigan State (9-1, 5-1) || elimination game for 1
Purdue (2-8, 1-5 Big Ten) @ Iowa (10-0, 6-0)
PAC vs PAC
Only teams with 2 or more losses remain
SEC vs SEC
Florida Atlantic (2-8, 1-3) @ Florida (9-1, 5-0)
Charleston Southern (9-1, 4-1) @ Alabama (9-1, 5-1)
IND vs ACC
Boston College (3-7) @ Notre Dame (9-1)
————————————————
AAC vs AAC
Houston (10-0, 6-0) @ Connecticut (5-5, 3-3)
.
…
.
4 playoff spots after this weekend ?? with 6 in drivers seat
ACC / Clemson
B12 / Oklahoma State
B1G / B1G CCG winner between Ohio State or Michigan State or Iowa
PAC / out at this time
SEC / SEC CCG winner between Alabama or Florida
IND / Notre Dame
AAC / Houston
LikeLike
You are crazy. Houston is not a candidate. Period. And they will probably lose to Navy. Also, Florida will not be an “or” in the driver’s seat until it beats FSU. Finally, Oklahoma is right there with Okie State, the loss notwithstanding.
LikeLike
redwood86,
“Houston is not a candidate. Period.”
I disagree. It would take a lot of dominoes falling, but it’s possible. If there are multiple 2-loss P5 champs, a 13-0 UH has to get a look. The P12 will have a 2-loss champ. The other 4 P5 conferences and ND all could, although it’s unlikely for any of them.
“And they will probably lose to Navy.”
Very possible. Or in the AACCG.
“Also, Florida will not be an “or” in the driver’s seat until it beats FSU.”
8-2 FSU is a major threat? They haven’t beaten a single team with 7 wins yet (only played 1). They are capable of beating UF, but they haven’t beaten a good team all season.
“Finally, Oklahoma is right there with Okie State, the loss notwithstanding.”
I think the loss leaves OU a half step behind for now.
LikeLike
““Finally, Oklahoma is right there with Okie State, the loss notwithstanding.”
I think the loss leaves OU a half step behind for now.”
But if Oklahoma wins out, that’ll include three solid wins in a row at the end over Baylor, TCU and the Cardiac Cowboys (Go Pokes!). So “for now” they are a half step behind, but they are in the unusual situation of having to cheer for the Cowboys for just one week … to beat Baylor to turn Bedlam into a CCG.
LikeLike
BruceMcF,
“But if Oklahoma wins out, that’ll include three solid wins in a row at the end over Baylor, TCU and the Cardiac Cowboys (Go Pokes!).”
It remains to be seen how solid those wins would be. Baylor hasn’t beaten anybody of note yet and neither has TCU. OkSU has beaten TCU and OU has beaten Baylor.
“So “for now” they are a half step behind, but they are in the unusual situation of having to cheer for the Cowboys for just one week … to beat Baylor to turn Bedlam into a CCG.”
Agreed.
LikeLike
Houston is not a candidate. Period. And they will probably lose to Navy. Also, Florida will not be an “or” in the driver’s seat until it beats FSU. Finally, Oklahoma is right there with Okie State, the loss notwithstanding.>
Brian referred to the “driver’s seat”. That perfectly describes Florida: win and they’re in, regardless of how probable you think it is.
Oklahoma likely needs help to get in: Notre Dame has to lose, or another league has to crown a 2-loss champion. Oklahoma State controls its destiny: win out, and they’d be undefeated. There’s no way an undefeated team is getting left out.
Houston has a chance, but it’s a long shot. Unlike the others on this list, they can’t win out and be practically assured of a playoff berth.
LikeLike
If OU wins out, I think they jump ND.
LikeLike
You’re probably right, now with ND’s game with Stanford devalued. If Nebraska-2001 was not punished for the CU debacle in late November, nor should OU for an October loss to UT.
LikeLike
With the computer polls now replaced with a small handful of people it seems less likely the Domers get jumped by the Sooners. Last time I looked the CFP had at least 5 that had some tie to South Bend. If the Irish can finish any year with no losses or a single loss they are automatically in the discussion.
LikeLike
redwood86 says:
November 16, 2015 at 6:05 pm
You are crazy. Houston is not a candidate. Period. And they will probably lose to Navy. Also, Florida will not be an “or” in the driver’s seat until it beats FSU. Finally, Oklahoma is right there with Okie State, the loss notwithstanding.
I post these every week
They are meant to show who is still possible by the numbers and may not reflect my personal opinion of who will actually get in.
.
…
.
However, to answer your points:
Houston is undefeated AND plays a 13th game. If they win 13 games and have zero losses without (4) P5’s also remaining undefeated would mean they probably slip in.
Florida controls its future, hence it is still quite in the hunt for a CFP spot. They are already in the SEC CCG so beating Florida State and the SEC West representative would make them 12-1 and probably an assured CFP spot.
If Oklahoma State loses to Oklahoma they are probably out with 1 loss. If Oklahoma wins out they will be in contention for a spot, but not assured of it. Spot #1 goes to an undefeated Clemson. Spot #2 is probably assured to the SEC CCG winner if they emerged with just 1 loss for the season. Spot #3 is probably assured to the 0 or 1 loss winner of the B1G CCG. Spot #4 is probably awarded to Notre Dame if they win out and finish with just 1 loss. The hopes for Oklahoma rests on one of the 4 scenarios above not happening.
While Oklahoma is a strong regional brand with nation exposure, Notre Dame really is a national team from the exposure point of view. As others have stated, Oklahoma is the stepchild as 12 games and no CCG is a penalty in modern P5 college football.
LikeLike
What will it take to convince you guys that the committee does not value an undefeated record, per se? These weekly 0 and 1-loss postings miss the point. Houston is #19. They are behind multiple 2-loss teams. Beating Navy and Temple is not going to boost them to #4. Even if Houston wins out, they will not pass Stanford if it wins out. Had they beaten Arkansas on the road, like Toledo did, Mississippi at home like Memphis did, or Notre Dame – as both Temple and Navy failed to do, then they might be a contender. But their best wins are against mediocre Louisville and Vanderbilt.
The Committee has made it VERY clear since inception last year that SOS is VERY important. That is why Houston is out, both the Big-12 and ACC are vulnerable, and the Pac-12 – with both its 9th conference game and more rigorous OoC scheduling – is being rated higher than pure W-L records would suggest.
LikeLike
Redwood86,
“What will it take to convince you guys that the committee does not value an undefeated record, per se?”
The committee not actually valuing an undefeated record. Until they keep out an undefeated P5 team for a 1-loss team, I won’t believe it. Keeping out an undefeated G5 champ for a 2-loss P5 team would be a partial step towards my belief.
“These weekly 0 and 1-loss postings miss the point.”
No, you miss their point.
“Houston is #19.”
For now. That’s up 5 spots from last week for beating Memphis (and other game results). They have a game against #16 coming up in 2 weeks which could also lead to a bump. They might face a ranked Temple in the CCG, too.
“They are behind multiple 2-loss teams.”
The boost for conference champion status doesn’t happen until the final poll. And some of those teams ahead of them will lose another game or even 2.
“Beating Navy and Temple is not going to boost them to #4.”
Not by itself, no.
“Even if Houston wins out, they will not pass Stanford if it wins out.”
That would include an upset win over ND.
“But their best wins are against mediocre Louisville and Vanderbilt.”
No, their best win is against Memphis. And they’d add Navy to that list.
“The Committee has made it VERY clear since inception last year that SOS is VERY important.”
The committee hasn’t made anything clear. Every week they provide different explanations for why certain teams are ranked where they are. Most people were completely surprised when the final poll came out last year and championship status was valued so highly. If SOS is so very important, explain the current rankings (Why OSU over ND, etc).
# of losses by ranking:
0 – 1, 3, 5, 6, 19
1 – 2, 4, 7-10, 16-18
2 – 11-15, 20, 21, 25
3 – 22-24
LikeLike
Brian says:
November 18, 2015 at 3:34 pm
The committee hasn’t made anything clear.
Correct response
LikeLike
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/view-rankings
CFP rankings:
1. Clemson
2. AL
3. OSU
4. ND
5. IA
6. OkSU
7. OU
8. UF
9. MSU
10. Baylor
12. MI
16. Navy – top G5 team
19. UH – lowest undefeated
20. NW
25. WI
B10 – 6/14 (43%)
B12 – 4/10 (40%)
P12 – 4/12 (33%)
SEC – 4/14 (29%)
AAC – 3/12 (25%)
ACC – 3/14 (21%)
LikeLike
Here’s another way of looking at the CFB playoff rankings:
1) Win out and they’re locks
a) Clemson
b) Alabama
c) Ohio State or Iowa
d) Oklahoma State
2) Win out and they’re probably in:
a) Florida. They’re currently 8th, but probably jump up to no worse than 4th with wins over FSU and Alabama.
b) Oklahoma. They’re currently 7th, but probably jump up to no worse than 4th with wins over TCU and Oklahoma State.
c) Michigan State. They’re currently 9th, but probably jump up to no worse than 4th with wins over Ohio State, Penn State and Iowa.
3) Needs some help:
a) Notre Dame. They’re currently 4th, but probably can’t hold onto that spot, even with wins over BC and Stanford, unless others (named above) lose.
4) Needs a LOT of help:
a) Michigan. Currently 12th. With wins over Penn State, Ohio State, and Iowa, and an Ohio State loss to Michigan State, they’d probably have the strongest resume with 2 losses, and could jump a 1-loss Big XII champ, as long as that champ is not Oklahoma. (The rest of the Big XII would be punished for their weak non-conference schedules.)
b) TCU/Baylor. Either one could still win or tie for the Big XII championship. But with one loss and weak non-conference schedules, they would need at least one of the other conference leaders (or Notre Dame) to lose again.
c) Stanford/Utah. They need a LOT of the current leaders to lose, in some cases more than once, but it’s mathematically possible.
d) North Carolina. They could win the ACC at 12-1, but they played two FCS schools. Probably not getting in without major collapses from a bunch of teams above them.
LikeLike
Michigan. Currently 12th. With wins over Penn State, Ohio State, and Iowa, and an Ohio State loss to Michigan State, they’d probably have the strongest resume with 2 losses, and could jump a 1-loss Big XII champ, as long as that champ is not Oklahoma. (The rest of the Big XII would be punished for their weak non-conference schedules.)
Sorry…that should have said: “an Ohio State victory over Michigan State”.
LikeLike
Good analysis, except I don’t think that Okie State is a lock even if it wins out (I would put them in the “probably in” category), and based upon the current information available, we have no way of predicting whether OU will be favored over ND.
To wit:
ND wins = road wins against highly-ranked Stanford, Pitt (which may be ranked ahead of TCU by 12/5), and Temple + home wins v. ranked USC & Navy and blow-out of Texas,. It’s loss = squeaker on the road in bad weather to the #1 team.
OU = road wins against highly-ranked Baylor, highly-ranked Oklahoma State, an okay Tennessee + home win against a fading TCU. Horrendous neutral site loss to Texas, which ND destroyed.
Bottom-line, while OU’s road wins will be better than ND’s, the overall resume will not necessarily be so. OU is not a slam dunk by any means.
LikeLike
I don’t think that Okie State is a lock even if it wins out…
Brian’s analysis from 538, cited below, is a reasonable approximation of the consensus. (I wrote my post without looking at 538.) There’s no f*cking way that 1-loss Notre Dame would get the bid over an undefeated P5 champ.
We have no way of predicting whether OU will be favored over ND…
We certainly do have a way, even if it’s not perfect. OU’s strength of schedule is better than ND’s, even now. And OU has two chances to improve it (TCU and Oklahoma State). Notre Dame has only one (the finale against Stanford).
LikeLike
I agree on Michigan. It would be nice to see Stanford beat ND, just to open up a spot there, and I don’t think that is entirely unrealistic either.
Michigan would likely have wins over top 5 OSU & Iowa, and most likely a win over a top 25 Northwestern team. I could see BYU/PSU possibly sneaking in the rankings, depending on how their schedules play out.
I assume Clemson is in at this point, with the only real ACC alternative being UNC. Alabama is most likely in as well, though an 11-1 UF beating them in the SECCG would just put UF in the playoff instead.
That leaves 2 spots for the Big 10, Big 12, Pac 12, and ND.
The Pac-12 is very unlikely at this point. Stanford, at 11, is the best shot for the Pac-12, but assuming they and Michigan win out, Michigan would have much more impressive wins.
So, I think an ND loss to Stanford alone most likely gets Michigan into the playoff. I have a tough time imagining a scenario where the Big 12 doesn’t get someone in. They have too many teams highly ranked as of this moment with 0 or fewer losses.
LikeLike
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-week-in-college-football-a-high-stakes-michigan-state-ohio-state-game/
And here is 538.com’s latest analysis.
Playoff chances if they win out:
Locks
> 99% – AL, Clemson, OSU
Almost locks
98% – OkSU
96% – IA
95% – MSU
92% – OU
Need help
63% – ND
58% – Baylor
55% – UNC
49% – Stanford
47% – MI
36% – TCU
So you say there’s a chance
5% – USC
4% – UH, Utah
3% – Navy
1% – FSU
The chances of winning out:
Clemson – 48%
AL – 47%
OU – 46%
ND – 40%
OSU – 35%
MI – 19%
OkSU – 17%
IA – 14%
MSU – 11%
LikeLike
The 538 article tries to provide insight on how the CFP committee is evaluating the eligible teams.
The 8 schools that still ‘control’ their destiny (locks: AL, Clemson, OSU; and almost locks: OkSU, IA, MSU, OK & FL) are:
1) all P5 schools with a chance at being conference champions;
2) all P5 that are undefeated are in;
3) 1 loss P5 with actual or potential SOS (AL, MSU, OK & FL) advantages are included.
The 6 six schools that ‘need help’ have some flaw
1) ND has 1 loss but can’t be crowned conference champion in a 13th game (if the final spot is between 1 loss OK and ND…it’ll be interesting to hear the CFP explanation of the merits of being a conference champion and SOS)
2) UNC has 1 loss & very weak SOS (13th game against a dominant Clemson would help…but likely not enough unless other dominoes fall)
3) Baylor & TCU have 1 loss, weaker SOS and no 13th game
4) Stanford & Michigan have 2 losses
The 5 ‘long shot’ candidates make for great conversations. It’s nice that the AAC is getting recognized a number of strong teams up top.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/14163970/bret-bielema-arkansas-razorbacks-coach-proposes-big-ten-sec-football-challenge
SEC coaches talk scheduling proposals.
Bielema wants an annual B10/SEC challenge (and no I-AA games).
The idea of actually cutting ties with FCS programs was met with mixed emotions from SEC coaches. Some FCS schools’ budgets rely on playing FBS programs, especially bigger Power 5 programs. While Alabama coach Nick Saban has long called for Power 5 schools to only play each other, Georgia coach Mark Richt, who works with FCS representatives as one of the board of trustees members with the American Football Coaches Association, said taking FCS schools off Power 5 schedules would “really hurt college football.”
Richt proposed his own idea for scheduling, suggesting that Power 5 schools’ strength of schedule should be ranked by their top 11 games, which would allow them to play an FCS opponent — if they chose — without being penalized.
LikeLike
I could see this primarily for the SEC West schools (plus TN and Vandy) with no in-state other conference-P5 rival.
LikeLike
Since the Big 10 effectively has a challenge with the SEC between the playoff and its bowl game structure, I doubt the Big 10 will be too receptive to Bielema’s idea. Pac-12 would not like it either since they like to schedule games with Big 10.
LikeLike
The P12 could have approved the B10/P12 Challenge. Since they didn’t, their feelings about B10 OOC scheduling are irrelevant. I don’t see the B10 and SEC ever scheduling such a challenge (neither side would want it) though. The B10 prefers more diversity in their OOC schedules.
LikeLike
Hey Frank,
I know your blog has more than a parochial interest, but how about throwing us Illini fans a bone and do a new column on the AD and FB coach positions with the beloved. Maybe an economic analysis of the value of a coach.
LikeLike
I actually like this idea.
With all that has gone on at Illinois in the past year or so in all different sports it might be nice to have a post devoted just to all that has happened and your thoughts.
LikeLike
It seemed strange that Chris Spielman suggested rather strongly that the Illini should lock up Cubit long term (this was during the much tighter 1st half of the game, mind you). Do you think Luke Fickell (or other OSU asst.) is being targeted by the Illini?
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/14173074/houston-offer-head-coach-tom-herman-raise-3-million-annually
UH is planning to offer Tom a Herman a raise from $1.35M per year to $3M per year in a bid to keep him. He’s already getting the highest HC salary UH has ever paid and the top G5 salary is currently $2.2M (Tuberville), so this is a huge commitment from them. Only a few schools would consider topping that offer, and most of them would probably prefer more than 1 year of HC experience..
LikeLike
With some of the talk that Houston may someday be a Big 12 target (not sure how realistic it is or not, myself), I see this as Houston really trying to make a move in the conference hierarchy. Herman could build them into an excellent program, and, with Texas down, Houston can possibly capture some recruiting momentum and longterm support if they can sustain success. If they manage that, I could see them ending up in the Big 12 one day.
LikeLike
I’m sure that’s the university’s thinking, though I’m not persuaded it will matter. Expansion is a long-term decision. If you’re the Big XII, you don’t add Houston merely because, right now, they happen to have the hot G5 coach. A couple more seasons like this one, and Herman will probably be gone.
LikeLike
I’d give him $5M to come back to Ohio State.
LikeLike
Getting rid of Meyer so quickly?
What did Urban do?
LikeLike
He didn’t win two titles last year? (High expectations…)
LikeLike
Hey! He lost 3 out of 4 games at OSU. That’s unacceptable.
LikeLike
I’m assuming he meant as OC.
LikeLike
Ah. Maybe if he’s willing to donate the money to fund a $5M per year OC, OSU would gladly do it.
I’m happy spending other people’s money as well.
LikeLike
There’s been lots and lots of news recently, but it’s usually difficult to explain the details briefly to those who haven’t been following all the interconnected details (including Porngate – it’s unbelievable) carefully for four years, but the implications of this tweet and linked story should be easy to imagine. BTW, the Paterno et al. v. NCAA trial is scheduled to begin in early 2017, and the Second Mile investigation is still ongoing.
Failure to fulfill fiduciary duty is a big deal. As I have said before, the scandal goes all the way up to Corbett, although I’m not sure in what ways an elected office holder can be held liable in such situations. I guess we’ll find out.
Maribeth Schmidt @MaribethSchmidt
Best part: “The trustees will be getting more information than the university initially had offered to provide.” http://bit.ly/1PD3OTB
8:58 PM – 19 Nov 2015
LikeLike
Alan – what’s really going on down there with Les?
LikeLike
I wouldn’t think he’s in trouble but two very respected members of the media are pushing this story. Scott Rabalais and Charles Hannigriff aren’t bomb throwers. They wouldn’t be pushing this story if there wasn’t substance to it.
Prior to the season, the expectation was 9-3. The 7-0 start with Fournette running over everyone raised expectations and everyone thought LSU would beat Alabama this season. Then LSU got pounded by the Tide. While LSU doesn’t really have a traditional rival, since the 2011 BCS NCG, the BAMA game has become a one game season, for both the team and the fans. The Arkansas game was a hangover game, but the Tigers really need to win at Ole Miss today and against A&M next Saturday for Les to keep his job.
It will cost LSU $17mm to buy Les and his assistants out, but it’s payable over 8 years.
I hope Les makes it and still have a hard time believing he’s playing for his job today, but that appears to be the case.
LikeLike
Wow.
I guess that a national title and 7 10-win seasons in 10 years doesn’t buy as much gratitude as it use to.
No LSU coach has won more national titles or more SEC titles (though some have tied Miles).
No LSU coach has close to as many 10-win seasons. No LSU coach since WWI has a better winning percentage (before WWI, LSU had a bunch of coaches who coached for a year or 2, and a few of those had good winning percentages).
LikeLike
Richard – I’m for Les but I’m part of an ever-shrinking minority. I’m old enough to remember the Mike Archer/Curly Hallman/Gerry DiNardo days. I’ll take 8-4 for a rebuilding year rather than 3-8 like the 90s. After the last 15 years, LSU fans have unrealistic expectations and Les has never been able to move out of Saban’s shadow.
I’d like to see Les stay, but with a 3 game losing streak (the first since 1999) and the way we’ve lost those games, the anti-Miles group has a lot of ammo.
LikeLike
Do Les and the AD not get along? Given the Chavis situation last year it seems like this has been in the works for a while.
LikeLike
Mike – I don’t think there’s ever been any friction between Alleva and Miles. It was Alleva who gave Miles this contract with a monster buyout. In retrospect, the board and president, think the buyout was too generous, and they instructed Alleva to tie the assistant contracts to Miles’. Chavis didn’t like it and left.
LikeLike
I suppose that Iowa is lucky that its boosters aren’t as loaded as LSU boosters.
LikeLike
Is OC at an SEC school preferable to HC at a fiscally/academic constrained PAC school?
http://www.ibabuzz.com/beartalk/2015/11/22/football-notebook-will-sonny-dykes-talk-contract-with-his-boss-sunday/
Would taking on Sonny Dykes as OC be objectionable to Miles?
LikeLike
Cal athletes aren’t academically constrained.
LikeLike
Cal’s academic standards have increased for athletes since Tedford was fired – a regime in which the Bears sank to new lows in terms of graduation rates. That said, Sonny Dykes is not all that.
LikeLike
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/11/19/big-ten-pac-12-jim-delany-nine-game-football-schedule-should-boost-not-blemish/76069654/
Delany talks about the 9 game schedule. He believes it should help teams in the eyes of the committee and that I-AA games should hurt. That’s not the same as him saying that will happen, just that he thinks that’s what should happen.
“I could see a two-loss team making it into the field under certain circumstances; I could see an undefeated team not making it to the field under certain circumstances,” Delany told USA TODAY Sports. “I really do think teams should be rewarded for playing FBS games and intersectional. I think that it’s good for conferences to play each other more and not less. I fully recognize that by going to the additional conference game you’re adding seven wins and you’re adding seven losses. …
“One of the problems with college football is we only have 13 data points. If you’re playing teams that have only 60 scholarships, if you’re not playing up, playing conference games, I think the committee should hold people accountable to that. I definitely can see situations where a two-loss team could be in over a one-loss team.”
…
Delany said the Big Ten has studied the impact of the new scheduling. Because the conferences’ teams win 95% of their games against FCS competition and 80% of their games against Group of Five teams, the new scheduling will eliminate some wins. He knows the change will cost the Big Ten a bowl-eligible team at some point.
“We also know that the chances for one of our good teams to lose is a little bit higher,” Delany said. “But that has to be offset by in-stadium attendance, building the conference and building strength of schedule. …
“I’m comfortable where we are.”
And from Larry Scott:
Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott told FoxSports.com this week, “I don’t think it will get revisited based on what happens in one year. Our philosophy of taking on all comers … is good for the student-athletes who only have a guaranteed 12 games per year, the schools that want to play each other as much as possible, and what’s good for our fans.
“Very, very low on the totem pole is what’s best to get a team in the playoff.”
LikeLike
We all know that the 9 game conference slate and no FCS games is mostly for attendance and TV money.
As for more losses, maybe not; many schools would be substituting the extra conference game for one vs. a P5 OOC opponent. The only schools who would have increased strength of schedule would be ones who loaded up on patsies OOC before.
LikeLike
We all know that the 9 game conference slate and no FCS games is mostly for attendance and TV money.
Yes, and as FTT has often pointed out: the presidents and ADs prefer predictable revenue for every team over the randomness of national championships and playoff berths.
As for more losses, maybe not; many schools would be substituting the extra conference game for one vs. a P5 OOC opponent.
Except, the Big Ten is requiring every school to play nine conference games plus a P5 non-conference opponent. Very few schools regularly scheduled two of those in a year (and there were some who scheduled zero), even when the Big Ten played eight conference games.
(The P5 non-conference requirement has since been undermined a bit, given that the league is now allowing Army, UConn, and Cincinnati as P5 equivalents, along with the more obvious Notre Dame and BYU. But with 14 league teams, most can’t wriggle their way out of it by scheduling Army every year.)
LikeLike
“Except, the Big Ten is requiring every school to play nine conference games plus a P5 non-conference opponent. Very few schools regularly scheduled two of those in a year (and there were some who scheduled zero), even when the Big Ten played eight conference games.”
Quite. The last five years, just looking at the five 2011-2015 members of the current Big Ten East … if we count members of the Old Big East when they were in their fading days of BCS AQ status, then TSUN had 9/5yrs, OSU 6/5yrs, MSY 5/5yrs, Penn State 4/5yrs, and Indiana 4/5yrs.
Count UC, BYU, and the Academies, and those averages go up, but then counting BYU and Navy gives OSU 3 P5 games in one year, which is a testimony that the academies are not REALLY considered to be actual P5 contests … they are just a concession to Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, etc. who have only a limited number of “cellar dweller” P5 schools to look for as “P5 peer” institutions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think attendance and TV ratings are the real motivation behind the P5 non-conference scheduling requirement. The service academies are pretty good draws on TV and in the stadium, even when they’re terrible. (As far as I can tell, the Big Ten right now is giving credit only for Army, because they’re still independent.)
Even Michigan has scheduled Army, although they’re playing @Arkansas the same year. Army has a winning all-time record vs. Michigan (5-4), though all of the Cadets’ wins came in 1954 or earlier, and the two haven’t played since 1962. That game will probably do pretty well on TV.
LikeLike
I wonder if those exceptions are temporary or if they effectively become-no MAC, CUSA or Sun Belt games count.
LikeLike
So far the concessions extend as far as “any FBS independent and members of the AQ Old Big East”. But if UConn and the Bearcats count, and that is permanent, then it would start to be a question why not Temple, USF, Houston and Navy, who had a better overall and conference record this year, and Memphis, who had a similar conference and better overall record?
And, of course, it won’t be “any FBS independent” next year, since UMass is not going to get the same treatment that BYU and Army get.
LikeLike
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/heres-what-your-part-of-america-eats-on-thanksgiving/
The important info is in – what Thanksgiving foods different parts of the US demand.
Everyone:
Turkey
Pumpkin pie
Side dishes:
West – salad
Great Plains – green beans/casserole
Great Lakes – rolls/biscuits
New England – squash
Southeast – mac & cheese, canned cranberry sauce
South – cornbread
Middle Atlantic – cauliflower
Secondary dessert:
Middle Atlantic and New England – apple pie
South and Southeast – pecan pie and sweet potato pie
Midwest and West – cherry pie
LikeLike
Growing up in MA, we always had a relish tray with a large variety of pickles (several vegies,not just cucumber), olives, green tomato piccalilli (Howard’s) apple sauce and cranberry sauce.
I hated the de riguer squash and yams. We always had pumpkin pie to go with the apple.
LikeLike
We have traditionally done it all. Turkey, Pumpkin pie, ham, green bean casserole, rolls, squash/casserole, cranberry sauce, cornbread, cauliflower and sometimes salad. Devilled eggs are essential and our family does scalloped oysters and sweet potatoes and mashed potatoes. Mac & Cheese is about the only thing we usually don’t do. No extended family this year, so we might skip a few things.
And its pecan pie and cake for the secondary deserts. Cherry and apple occasionally. With sweet potatoes, we don’t need the sweet potato pie.
LikeLike
And we had the relish tray with pickles and olives.
LikeLike
Pecan pie!
That applies to any holiday, birthday, or any day ending in y.
LikeLike
Growing up in central Ohio, we normally had jellied cranberry salad with apples, nuts, etc., though when I make it, I make it with crushed pineapple instead of diced apples, since I like it better and its easier to make. Always had green beans, always had sweet potatoes, normally gussied up in some way, always had biscuits or rolls, often had cornbread, never had Mac & Cheese. Both pumpkin and mincemeat pies when I was growing up. After my mom lived in Augusta for a few years, she swapped that for pumpkin and pecan pies.
LikeLike
Thanksgiving is becoming a more popular exotic foreign holiday to celebrate in Beijing and other large Chinese cities …
… the Volunteers Club put on a Thanksgiving Dinner on Thursday (it would have been 6am, Eastern Time in the US), with Turkey, sweet potatoes and yams … steamed broccoli, fried fish, fried rice … and of course, Pizza, because what is a Western Dinner without Pizza?
No Pie other than Pizza Pie, though. Had to wait until the Friday evening Laowei (foreigner) Thanksgiving Party next door to score some Pumpkin and Apple pie.
LikeLike
McCaffery for Heisman? 282 all purpose yards…at half. Leads country in same.
LikeLike
0 & 1 loss teams after 12 weeks and who picked up 2nd loss
________________________________________________
ACC 14.29% / 14 teams / 2 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 11 – 0 Clemson || @ South Carolina
(1) | 10 – 1 North Carolina || @ NC State
(x) | none this week
B12 30.00% / 10 teams / 4 teams remain / NO CCG
(1) | 10 – 1 Oklahoma State || vs Oklahoma
(1) | 10 – 1 Oklahoma || @ Oklahoma State
(1) | 9 – 1 Baylor || @ TCU / vs Texas
(x) | TCU picked up 2nd loss this week
B1G 21.43% / 14 teams / 3 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 10 – 1 Ohio State || @ Michigan
(1) | 11 – 0 Iowa || @ Nebraska
(1) | 10 – 1 Michigan State || vs Penn State
(x) | none this week
PAC 00.00% / 12 teams / 0 teams remain / CCG
(0) | last undefeated eliminated in Week 8
(0) | last 1 loss eliminated in Week 11
(x) | none this week – Stanford only 2 loss team in PAC
SEC 14.29% / 14 teams / 2 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 10 – 1 Alabama || @ Auburn
(1) | 10 – 1 Florida || vs Florida State
(x) | none this week
IND 33.33% / 3 teams / 1 team remains / NO CCG
(1) | 10 – 1 Notre Dame || @ Stanford
————————————————
AAC 00.00% / 12 teams / 0 remain / CCG
(1) | 10 – 1 Houston || probably eliminated in week 12
(1) | 9 – 1 Navy || probably eliminated in week 8
(x) | none this week
MAC 0.00% / 13 teams / 0 remain / CCG
(1) | 9 – 1 Toledo || probably eliminated in week 10
CUSA 0.00% / 13 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 10
SUN 0.00% / 11 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 10
MWC 0.00% / 12 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 7
.
…
.
Week 13 games – undefeated teams in BOLD
________________________________________________
ACC vs ACC
North Carolina (10-1, 7-0) @ NC State (7-4, 3-4)
ACC vs SEC
Clemson (11-0) @ South Carolina (3-8)
B12 vs B12
Baylor (9-1, 6-1) @ TCU (9-2, 6-2)
Oklahoma (10-1, 7-1) @ Oklahoma State (10-1, 7-1)
B1G vs B1G
Iowa (11-0, 7-0) @ Nebraska (5-6, 3-4)
Ohio State (10-1, 6-1) @ Michigan (9-2, 6-1)
Penn State (7-4, 4-3) @ Michigan State (10-1, 6-1)
PAC vs PAC
Only teams with 2 or more losses remain
SEC vs SEC
Alabama (10-1, 6-1) @ Auburn (6-5, 2-5)
SEC vs ACC
Florida State (9-2) @ Florida (10-1)
IND vs PAC
Notre Dame (10-1) @ Stanford (9-2)
————————————————
AAC vs AAC
Navy (9-1, 7-0) @ Houston (10-1, 6-1)
.
…
.
4 playoff spots locked down? Win and you are in.
ACC / Clemson
B1G / B1G CCG winner between Michigan State or Iowa or Ohio State
SEC / SEC CCG winner between Alabama or Florida
IND / Notre Dame
B12 / outside looking in?
LikeLike
@ Alan
How about The Citadel!
Sad to see your Tigers drop 3 as I had them preseason to win the SEC but not like any were bad losses so Tiger Nation needs to chill out on the dump Miles talk.
LikeLike
Thanks, Duff. My son and I watched the game together. What a great win! It was The Citadel’s first win against South Carolina since 1990. The Bulldogs are also co-champs of the Southern Conference and may now make the FCS playoffs.
Regarding Miles, I’d like to see him given a chance to right the ship and feel like next year is LSU’s year with all we have coming back and all that Bama and Ole Miss are losing. Unless we destroy A&M next week, I don’t see that happening though. It’s a shame. Les is a good man.
LikeLike
Mark Richt at UGA is in trouble. Its not just the columnists that have come out against him. There was an AJC article (didn’t see it on-line yet) talking about a half dozen board members being ready to fire him. One thing mentioned in that article bothered me too. They were REALLY excited about every score and about beating Georgia Southern. Struck me as a team with low expectations. They also talked about the 3rd string QB starting and playing the whole game against Florida. The next week he didn’t even practice at QB. So, why, in the most important game of the season did you leave him in there to throw 4 INTs?
LikeLike
Sparty on!
Iowa undefeated
True Story
LikeLike
71 teams have qualified for the 80 bowl slots split 42 P5/Ind, 29 Go5. There are 14 more teams 1 win away, and another 4 alive but requiring 2 wins. It looks like 2-4 teams with 5-7 records will get in. The B1G has 4 of the 8 P5 teams that could finish 5-7. Nebraska is probably in even if they lose to Iowa. The situation is not as clear for the other 3. Indiana should beat Purdue; however, MN and IL probably need to upset WI and NW to go bowling. Other P5 teams on the bubble are WA, VT, MO, and KY. For Go5, 4 of the 6 teams are favored to win, leaving 5 slots for the 8 P5 teams. . .
LikeLike
Paul Rhoads is out in Ames; I’m sure that 4th-quarter dollapse at KSU was the breaking point.
This is a crucial hire for Iowa State. If the program doesn’t substantially improve, ISU could be in trouble come the next go-round of conference musical chairs. And great basketball with corresponding attendance (both men’s and women’s) won’t save the day for the Cyclones. Look at Connecticut.
LikeLike
Is this an unusually high number of coaching changes for one year? Or is it just the number happening during the season that makes it seem unusual.
LikeLike
It feels like fanbases are getting more and more impatient and demanding (and irrational).
I have heard of Nebraska fans calling for a first-year coach’s head. Winning a national title, 7 10 win seasons, being the most successful coach ever at LSU and winning seasons in down years doesn’t seem to be enough for many LSU fans. Heck, many NU fans are still calling for Fitz to at least fire some assistants despite a 9-2 record at a school that almost never achieves that sort of success (even if we lose out from here, this will be among the top 5 most successful seasons in the last hundred years or so at NU). And after the losses to UMich and Iowa, some were calling for Fitz’s own head.
College football is fast approaching the insanity of some foreign soccer leagues, where close to a majority or more get rid of multiple head coaches every season.
LikeLike
And we all know that if it wasn’t for the insane contract that they gave him, Iowa would have gotten rid of Ferentz long ago.
Luckily for them, they didn’t.
LikeLike
Is this an unusually high number of coaching changes for one year? Or is it just the number happening during the season that makes it seem unusual.
I was thinking the same thing yesterday. I don’t know what’s “par” for the number of coaching changes in one season.
But I’m positive that we have more intra-season vacancies than ever before. Schools almost always used to wait till the end of the regular season to make a decision — no matter how obvious it was that a firing was inevitable.
LikeLike
I think its a combination of high profile positions with schools firing earlier in the year. I don’t think firing early makes sense except in unusual circumstances. ISU is not particularly early, but all the previous were.
LikeLike
The firing of Rhoads seems to be justified. He had some initial success (by Iowa State standards), getting them to lower-tier bowls in three out of his first four seasons. But the wheels fell off in the last three, going 3-9, 2-10, 3-8, including just four Big XII wins in the last three years.
But what’s the standard at Iowa State? In the last hundred years, only two coaches have left Ames with a winning record. Earle Bruce was the most recent example, and he only just barely achieved it, going 36-32 in six seasons. Before that, you go back to Charles Mayser, who went 21-11-2 from 1915–19.
The Cyclones have not won a league championship since 1912, have made the final AP poll just twice (1976, 2000), have a losing all-time record against every current Big XII team except K-State, and have just twelve all-time bowl appearances, going 3-9.
If the program doesn’t substantially improve, ISU could be in trouble come the next go-round of conference musical chairs.
I wouldn’t be so concerned. There are two scenarios. The first is that the Big XII expands. They’re already having trouble finding 11th & 12th teams that they want. They’re not going to make the job even harder by kicking out Iowa State.
The second scenario is that the Big XII dies after Texas and Oklahoma accept better offers. In that case, the Cyclones will be scrambling for a new home, but there’s nothing the they could realistically do in the next 10 years to alter that outcome.
LikeLike
Considering the disarray in the Ohio State team, are they likely to lose the Michigan game and the upcoming (non-playoff) bowl game?
LikeLike
Michigan would have been 50-50 regardless.
In the bowl game, it depends on who they face. Especially if they lose to Michigan and face a team like UGa, I can see a multi-TD beatdown by the Buckeyes.
LikeLike
Considering the disarray in the Ohio State team, are they likely to lose the Michigan game and the upcoming (non-playoff) bowl game?
The purported disarray is vastly over-stated. Until Saturday, this was the team that mowed down 23 straight opponents, 30 straight regular-season conference opponents, and had a remarkable run to a national championship with a 3rd-string QB—one of the best coaching jobs I have ever seen.
After one loss, albeit a very ugly loss, suddenly that’s all forgotten? I would not be surprised at all if they bounce back, and take both Michigan and the bowl opponent to the woodshed. (Obviously, it does depend who the bowl opponent is.)
LikeLike
They seem to really miss Herman.
The raw talent is definitely there.
And agree that the disarray angle is overstated. Those kids were going to go pro regardless, and after a frustrating loss, frustrations nay be let out by some kids who really aren’t that old.
Doesn’t mean that they won’t go all out vs. UMich. Especially Zeke, who knows that scouts will be watching to see how he performs in a big game after running his mouth.
Remember that Marshawn Lynch called out his coach after not getting the ball as well.
LikeLike
Sorry, it wasn’t Lynch ripping Carroll. It was almost every other Seahawk ripping Carroll for the SB playcall.
LikeLike
Its notable how little attention people pay to the AP and Coaches’ polls once the CFP Poll comes out. That doesn’t bode well for pushing the start of it back another week or two.
LikeLike
“Its notable how little attention people pay to the AP and Coaches’ polls once the CFP Poll comes out.”
Deservedly so. The polls the last two weeks have been ridiculous, with no consideration given to SOS.
LikeLike
Hm. Ourand says he foresees a huge rights increase for the B10. Then says it will double.
I suppose the key is what will double? The average over the life of the contract or the year-to-year jump at the beginning of the contract.
For example, for the StL Cardinals, their annual average over the life of the contract jumped from $20M to $66M, but the year-to-year jump was from $30M to $50M (and they got a share of Fox Sports Midwest).
The B10 has grown as well, so is that doubling per school or of the contract?
The B10 will probably receive close to $150M from the old contract in it’s final year. A doubling of the average (from $100M to $200M) would be extremely disappointing (it would be less than the Pac got, and B10 TV ratings blow that conference’s away). But if it’s a year-to-year doubling and per school, that means $30M/year per school in the first year and an average annual amount of $500M-$600M over 15 years.
An $8.4B 15 year contract.
LikeLike
It’s official: The five-time national champion Miami Hurricanes will play at Kidd-Brewer Stadium in Boone, NC on September 17, 2016 against my alma mater Appalachian State Mountaineers. It’s a really, really big deal for App State. I can hardly wait. This will be, by far, the biggest name opponent ever to play football in Boone.
http://www.appstatesports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=21500&ATCLID=210529089
Miami is probably the only school of its historical caliber that App could hope to get. My guess is that the game in Boone will easily outdraw the one in Miami, unless Miami starts getting back to competing for national championships by 2021.
It’s a great time to be an App State fan/alum.
LikeLike
That’s really surprising. Is there a batch of recruits nearby Miami is seeking?
LikeLike
It’s not really about Miami’s recruiting. Miami plays in NC twice every odd-numbered year, and App State is 2+ hours from its primary in-state recruiting bases (Charlotte and Greensboro/Winston-Salem).
Really, a lot of this was being at the right place at the right time. App State was set to play NC Central (FCS team) after UMass had postponed on App to play South Carolina. The NC Central game was postponed to make room for this Miami game. So there was some luck to it, but the App State AD also has been seeking a game like this from day one. He was critical in helping make this happen.
For Miami’s part, there wasn’t really any leverage. App State were scheduled to have a home game, giving them 6 home and 6 road games. App wasn’t going to give up a home game to play Miami on the road. App State already has a “guarantee” game at Tennessee next year. Additionally, Miami isn’t like Michigan, Alabama, and most traditional powers where they can get teams to play them at home with no return game. Those schools average 80,000+ to App State’s mid-20,000’s. Miami, though, has a notoriously sparsely filled stadium for just about everyone except Florida State, Florida, Notre Dame, and maybe the occasional Ohio State or Oklahoma. I have no doubt that the Miami @ App game will outdraw at least a few Miami home games next year. That puts App on a more level playing field, at least when it comes to scheduling.
http://miamiherald.typepad.com/sports-buzz/2015/11/marlins-set-offseason-plan-try-to-reverse-free-agent-cold-streak-canes-schedule-news-um-dolphins-hea.html
We hear UM football is close to finalizing a deal to play at Appalachian State (Boone, N.C.) next season, with the teams playing a game at Sun Life in a future year. Appalachian State, a member of the Sun Belt Conference, is 7-1, with its only loss to Clemson. The Canes needed to fill an opening, and Appalachian State was one school that could accommodate UM on short notice.
UM’s other 2016 non-conference games: Florida A&M, FAU and at Notre Dame.
LikeLike
It begins:
“Rob Lytle made his final commitment to the University of Michigan and Bo Schembechler while staring into the angry eyes of famed Ohio State coach Woody Hayes. During Dad’s recruitment, he and Woody bonded while dissecting battles from the Civil War as if they were defenses from a future opponent. But now that Dad had made his decision to attend Michigan, Woody sat in the living room at my grandparents demanding to know why. That day, Dad summoned the courage to tell Coach Hayes that he thought Michigan ‘was a better fit’ for him. The two men never spoke again, their relationship another casualty of being on opposite sides of the rivalry between Michigan and Ohio State.”
A real Ohio State – Michigan story by Kelly Lytle
http://kellylytle.com/2015/11/25/a-real-ohio-state-michigan-story/
Happy thanksgiving, everyone!
LikeLike
Hello everyone! It’s been a crazy time in the Frank the Tank household, but I’m working on a post for next week. Happy Thanksgiving and enjoy the food and football!
LikeLike
OSU on the doorstep at #5, hoping that either UF or UNC (but preferably UF) can pull off a massive upset next week.
The funny thing is, I think that they’d have the best chance to win it all, but they might not even make the playoffs.
LikeLike
Well OSU finally showed up yesterday. I really thought this team would repeat, but their funk lasted nearly a full season. It would be quite interesting to learn what happened with OSU behind the scenes this year.
LikeLike
If they make the playoffs, I think they have a good chance of repeating.
They will need a major upset, though.
LikeLike
Since they are out of the B1G championship game, they are out of the playoffs. They are even out of the Rose Bowl if either MSU or IU get into the playoffs.
And it would be interesting to know what went on behind the scenes this year. They were down all year until yesterday, when they looked like the national champ of last year. However, champions usually have an off year after their great season, and OSU simply fits the established pattern.
LikeLike
OK, so who is #4 if UF upsets ‘Bama or UNC upsets Clemson?
LikeLike
Dear Richard. That’s a good question. But tOSU is now the number three team in the B1G and is necessarily out of contention. If Clemson and ‘Bama lose their conference championship games, they are out, too. So that leaves three slots open, not just the fourth. Only Oklahoma is guaranteed a slot.
LikeLike
You can say that OSU is the #3 team in the B10 if you like, but if OSU and Iowa meet, I’m picking the Buckeyes.
LikeLike
If Clemson is upset, UNC or Stanford will get the playoff spot. So you will need both Alabama and Stanford to be upset in the SEC/P12 championship games to put OSU in play. OSU will be in the Fiesta or Peach bowl with Notre Dame, the AAC champ and Clemson or Alabama if either gets upset. Face it, OSU is in the position TCU was in last year, no matter where OSU ranks in the poll released this week they will not make the final four.
75 teams have qualified for the 80 bowl slots. Top teams with 5 wins to fill the remaining slots are NE, MO, KSU, MN, and San Jose St. KSU, S.AL, and GA St still have a game left and will qualify with a win.
LikeLike
You can make the case for UNC (with a win) over OSU.
Tougher to make the case for Stanford over OSU.
But OK, they may need 2 upsets. If ‘Bama and Stanford both lose, however, I don’t think OSU is just in play; I think they’d be guaranteed a spot. Who else would even be a candidate in that scenario?
LikeLike
From the College Football Playoff website:
“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 chooses the four teams for the playoff based on strength of schedule, head-to-head results against common opponents, championships won and other factors.”
Stanford already trumps tOSU on SoS by a HUGE margin, and has already won 1 championship (Pac-12 North). The two teams did not have any common opponents. So if Stanford beats USC, tOSU has no legs to stand on except: 1) it was 4-0 against a weak OoC schedule while Stanford was 2-1 against an OoC schedule with 2 top-15 ranked teams, 2) it is a huge fan draw, and 3) it clobbered an over-rated Michigan team (literally almost lost to both Minnesota and Indiana) the week after choking at home against a team playing without its QB.
tOSU should get in over UNC because SoS, common opponent results (VTech), and “other factors” will trump not winning a championship.
LikeLike
Have you looked at UNC’s schedule?
They lost to a school with a losing record who lost to Citadel. And they played 2 FCS schools.
The committee clearly doesn’t respect UNC right now, and for good reason.
Also, UMich outplayed MSU and blew away some good teams.
If everyone has one loss, OSU would have a stronger schedule than either UNC or Iowa.
LikeLike
Richard, how do you figure that tOSU’s schedule is stronger than Iowa’s??? tOSU played NOBODY. 1-1 against ranked teams – one of which was without their starting QB! Iowa is 3-0 v. ranked teams. But both schools played weak schedules.
LikeLike
NU is ranked and now Wisconsin (barely). Who’s the 3rd ranked team that Iowa beat?
LikeLike
If Bama and Stanford both lose, the 4 teams will likely be: Clemson, Oklahoma, Michigan State, and Iowa. tOSU is the #3 team in its own conference. It can’t pass MSU, and it will only pass Iowa if the Spartans blow out the Hawkeyes.
It is silly to talk about Bama losing to Florida, but substitute Clemson for Bama and you get the same result: Alabama, Oklahoma, Michigan State, and Iowa. This, of course, would most likely lead to an Alabama v. Oklahoma final since the BiG 10 is so over-rated this season.
Bottom-line is that the Big 10 is the only conference with a chance to get two teams into the playoff, but it will most likely only happen if two of Alabama, Clemson, and Stanford lose AND Michigan State beats Iowa in a competitive game.
LikeLike
Iowa has almost no chance if they lose. The committee has already made it clear with their ranking that they don’t respect them. It would take a lot of upsets for Iowa to get in.
LikeLike
0 & 1 loss teams after 13 weeks and who picked up 2nd loss
________________________________________________
ACC 14.29% / 14 teams / 2 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 12 – 0, 8-0 Clemson || vs North Carolina
(1) | 11 – 1, 8-0 North Carolina || vs Clemson
(x) | none this week
B12 10.00% / 10 teams / 1 team remains / NO CCG
(1) | 10 – 1 Oklahoma
(x) | Oklahoma State and Baylor picked up 2nd loss this week
B1G 14.29% / 14 teams / 2 teams remain / CCG
(1) | 12 – 0, 8-0 Iowa || vs Michigan State
(1) | 11 – 1, 7-1 Michigan State || vs Iowa
(x) | none this week
PAC 00.00% / 12 teams / 0 teams remain / CCG
(x) | none this week – Stanford only 2 loss team in PAC
SEC 07.14% / 14 teams / 1 team remains / CCG
(1) | 11 – 1 Alabama || vs Florida
(x) | Florida picked up 2nd loss this week
IND 00.00% / 3 teams / 0 teams remain / NO CCG
(0) | Notre Dame picked up 2nd loss this week
————————————————
AAC 00.00% / 12 teams / 0 remain / CCG
(1) | 11 – 1 Houston || probably eliminated in week 12
(x) | Navy picks up second loss
MAC 0.00% / 13 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 13
CUSA 0.00% / 13 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 10
SUN 0.00% / 11 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 10
MWC 0.00% / 12 teams / 0 remain / eliminated in week 7
.
…
.
Week 14 games – undefeated teams in BOLD
________________________________________________
ACC CCG (Charlotte) 8pm EST on ABC
North Carolina (11-1, 8-0) vs Clemson (12-0, 8-0)
B12 no CCG
Oklahoma (11-1, 8-1)
B1G CCG (Indianapolis) 8pm EST on FOX
Iowa (12-0, 8-0) vs Michigan State (11-1, 7-1)
PAC CCG (Santa Clara) 8pm on ESPN
Stanford (10-2, 8-1) vs Southern California (8-4, 6-3)
Only teams with 2 or more losses remain
SEC CCG (Atlanta) 4pm EST
Alabama (11-1, 7-1) @ Florida (10-2, 7-1)
AAC CCG (Houston) 12pm EST on ABC
Houston (11-1, 7-1) vs Temple (10-2, 7-1)
.
…
.
4 playoff spots locked down? Win and you are in.
ACC / Clemson
B1G / B1G CCG winner between Michigan State or Iowa
SEC / Alabama
B12 / Oklahoma
LikeLike
What’s with Illinois? Nothing says vote of confidence like a 2 year deal with a new coach. Illinois thinking of dropping football? Really odd move.
LikeLike
“What’s with Illinois?”
Interim chancellor, interim vice chancellor, interim provost, interim AD. Large appropriation shortfall from the state legislature. Who the heck has the official power to carry out a coaching search and hand out a large contract?
Cubit was basically given another year as interim coach. It is probably the best move considering what is going on at the university.
LikeLike
@greg – We (Illinois) are so dysfunctional right now regarding university leadership. John Groce could ultimately be on the hot seat with how the basketball team (which has significantly higher expectations than the football program) is performing right now, too. However, what solid coaching candidate is going to want to be hired by an interim AD? For that matter, what solid AD candidate is going to want to be hired by an interim chancellor and other shifts at the top? This is just a brutal period.
LikeLike
I’ve had the theory that it should be facilitating the eventual hire of current Loyola Academy (H.S.) coach and former Illini standout LB John Holocek. Ideally, Holocek should take on at least a D-II or moribund FCS program in the intervening period. Cubit is of an age (62) near enough wthat he can be let in on this (3-4) plan.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/ncf/story/_/id/14249652/rutgers-scarlet-knights-fires-coach-kyle-flood-ad-julie-hermann
Rutgers fires Kyle Flood and Julie Hermann (who never should have been fired in the first place).
That makes 4 Big Ten teams to fire both their AD and FB coach this year (Illinois, Maryland and Michigan being the others)
LikeLike
*never should have been hired in the first place
LikeLike
Anderson still is AD at Maryland.
LikeLike
My bad, I meant Minnesota not Maryland.
LikeLike
That makes 4 Big Ten teams to fire both their AD and FB coach this year (Illinois, Maryland and Michigan being the others).
Michigan fired its AD and football coach last year, not this year.
LikeLike
Ok, past 13 months.
LikeLike
Chip Kelly pooped pants just now.
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/11/30/9818584/clay-helton-usc-head-football-coach
LikeLike
Michigan’s Durkin is rumored to be the new coach at Maryland. He’s young (37) and a fine recruiter — but he’s a defensive coordinator, which is ticking off casual Terp fans. They want an offensive-minded (read pass-happy) coach, probably a by-product of living in QB-obsessed NFL country. But I’d rather win 17-7 than to be in 55-51 shootouts each week.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t wish the Maryland job on my worst enemy. With UM, OSU, MSU, and PSU in the same division, they’ll need a wacky combination of unusual events to ever win the division. Even if they got Bear Bryant back, their chances wouldn’t be good.
With the credentials Durkin is building up, he’s going to be a candidate for much better jobs if he just waits another year or two.
LikeLike
Different schools have different goals. Winning bowls may be enough at UMD.
Agree that this isn’t the best move for Durkin, though.
You want a place where you can win. That sets you up better for later. That’s why Narduzzi and Herman made smart moves.
LikeLike
I suppose Terp fans believe Oregon rose above its station thanks to Nike; why can’t Under Armour’s money do the same for Maryland? But the Big Ten is like Southern Cal x 2 (actually x 3 or 4 if PSU and Nebraska regain kingly status).
Now the talk has turned to hiring Mark Richt — I would be shocked if he wound up in College Park, no matter how much $ Kevin Plank offers him. It hasn’t been perceived as a school with a good football culture since the days of Jim Tatum, and they ended 60 years ago.
Maryland may wind up with a coach similar in status to Toledo’s Matt Campbell (a smart hire by Iowa State, BTW, as it’s as good a candidate as ISU was going to get).
LikeLike
I suppose Terp fans believe Oregon rose above its station thanks to Nike; why can’t Under Armour’s money do the same for Maryland?
Sure, I don’t doubt that some Terp fans have crazy fantasies about the level of winning that is realistically possible there.
But I don’t think that job makes any sense for Durkin, who is building the sort of resume that would put him on the track for a big-time head coaching job. in a few years. If he doesn’t get one of those directly, his first job needs to be at a place where he can win impressively, and use it as a stepping stone. I don’t think Maryland is that job.
LikeLike
Well, he took it. We’ll see what happens; many Terp fans, wanting a QB-oriented mastermind, remain unconvinced.
LikeLike
Amazingly, the B10 may be able to fill all it’s bowl slots (which is more than the ESS-EEE-SEE can say), albeit with the help of 3 teams below .500.
Here are my B10 bowl projections:
MSU, Iowa, and OSU in NY6 bowls (if I had to predict: MSU in the CFP, Iowa in the Rose, OSU vs. Houston in the Fiesta).
Citrus: Michigan
Outback: Northwestern
Music City: PSU
Pinstripe: IU
Bay Area bowl: Nebraska
Detroit bowl: UIUC
Ft. Worth bowl: Minny
Say hello to lovely Detroit in December for us, Frank!
LikeLike
@Richard – I went to the Bears-Lions game at Ford Field in October with my brother-in-law (also went to the epic MSU-Michigan game on Saturday and a Red Wings game on Friday) and we were joking that I could be coming back to an Illinois bowl there. Might be coming true!
LikeLike
Though I wonder: how will they break an APR tie?
UIUC and Rice are tied in APR.
LikeLike
OK, so if there a tie, both will be eligible (and 1 bowl-eligible team will be left out).
So both UNL and Minny are going bowling then, and the Illini need both South Alabama and Georgia State to lose (or some teams to turn down bowl bids) in order to go to a bowl.
LikeLike
They can’t both get a waiver if it means one bowl eligible team is left out … their waiver is contingent on all bowl eligible teams getting a bowl. So its got to be one of the bowl ineligible teams with a waiver that gets left out. Could come down to a coin toss, if they agree to do that rather than see which acceptance has an earlier time stamp.
LikeLike
@BruceMcF – What’s clear about this process is that it’s as clear as mud. I’ve asked people like Brett McMurphy and Ralph Russo on Twitter and the responses indicate that the NCAA is flying by the seat of its pants. Maybe it will be by who accepts first. Maybe it will be by a coin flip. Maybe it will be by which bowl has the higher payout (which I honestly believe is a more likely outcome than the other two tiebreakers).
What I *think* will happen is that once it is determined who is bowl eligible after Saturday’s games, then the bowl slots are filled by contract just as they would in any normal season. The only dispute would be if it comes down to a slot between Illinois and Rice and there happens to be both an open Big Ten tie-in and C-USA tie-in and neither want to take San Jose State. That could technically happen since the Arizona Bowl C-USA slot could be open, but there are indications that they would take Arizona (since the Pac-12 has an excess of bowl eligible teams) instead, which would leave the Big Ten tie-in open for Illinois. We can read the tea leaves with Illinois initially hedging about whether they would accept a bowl bid but then coming out and affirmatively saying that they’d go, whereas Rice remains undecided. That probably shows that Illinois got some assurances that they’re getting in if they’re eligible while Rice hasn’t received any assurances. That allows for Rice to “gracefully” preemptively decline an invitation that they weren’t ever going to receive in the first place, which is better from a PR standpoint.
LikeLike
Some good Terp news: This week, both Maryland basketball teams were ranked inn the AP Top 5 for the first time ever (men #2, women #5). We’ll see how long that lasts after the men visit UNC tonight.
LikeLike
There is a lot of speculation on sports talk programs regarding what teams will make the playoffs if there are upsets this weekend in the college conference championship games. Eg, how might tOSU get in, or does Clemson get in with a loss to UNC?
The commenters overlook the need for conferences to protect the value of their championship games. If UNC beats Clemson, the ACC will insist that UNC be selected, and it will prevent Clemson from accepting an offer. Similarly, the B1G will not allow a third place tOSU to go in place of either a second place MSU or Iowa. Teams that lose the championship game are out unless the committee takes two teams from the same conference. Only conference champions are in, and at least one of them is out. Otherwise, CCG’s are worthless.
LikeLike
@bob sykes – I don’t think for one second that the ACC or Big Ten (or anyone else) would *prevent* a conference championship game loser or a team like Ohio State from going to the playoff. It might shake out that way since the CFP committee (at least based on last season) does seem to place some value on conference championship game outcomes, but the conferences themselves can’t complain when they went out of their way to create a system based on the subjective whims of a group of people. If they really want conference championship games to be guaranteed to matter, then they ought to create an 8-team playoff where all of those winners receive an auto-bid (but that’s a longer discussion for another day).
LikeLike
Just to pile onto what FTT already said: The rules very clearly contemplate that, at times, a conference could place two teams into the playoff. The rules also say that championships are weighed when comparing teams with otherwise comparable resumes.
It does not make CCGs “worthless” if they are one of many factors considered, yet not totally dispositive. In leagues with CCGs, the rules as written make it pretty hard for the loser to make the playoff. But they chose deliberately to make it possible.
One can, without difficulty, construct scenarios where a CCG loser, or perhaps even a team that did not reach its league’s CCG, is one of the four best teams. For this season, it would take a number of CCG upsets, but it could happen.
LikeLike
It also depends on how you define “best”. I see OSU as being among the 4 teams that have the best chance at winning a title if they played a 2-round playoff.
You can certainly say that they don’t have one of the 4 best resumes in the country, though.
LikeLike
An update on P12N. Only thing really new is some insight into this falls failure to get DTV.
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2015/11/30/In-Depth/Pac12.aspx?
LikeLike
If the Chargers leave, I wonder what happens to San Diego St. Will the city want to tear down the stadium?
LikeLike
Why would they?
I can’t imagine that maintaining a stadium (so long as it’s structurally sound) is all that expensive.
RFK is still around.
Heck, Legion Field is still around.
LikeLike
The Astrodome costs from about 200k to $2.4 million a year to keep around depending on whether you are asking someone who wants to tear it down or someone who wants to keep it. It would cost about $60 million to tear it down. Of course, it would be torn down to be a parking lot. San Diego might have better uses for that stadium land.
http://swamplot.com/keeping-the-astrodome-around-is-a-whole-lot-cheaper-than-you-thought-it-was/2014-05-16/
LikeLike
The difference is that Qualcomm Stadium still has San Diego State and 2 bowls as tenants and the market doesn’t have another new stadium like Houston (or else the Chargers wouldn’t be moving in the first place). So, the stadium is also the market’s only venue for large concerts, soccer games and other events held in football stadiums. San Diego is a really large market to not have *any* stadium of that size at all – there isn’t even a college stadium option (as SDSU uses Qualcomm), so it’s a very different situation compared to the Astrodome. There’s still a lot of use for Qualcomm Stadium without the Chargers (particularly in a city with weather like San Diego where it can easily be used the entire year).
LikeLike
@bullet – San Diego State still uses it along with the Holiday and Poinsetta Bowls, so the city would keep it running. If cities were to only keep stadiums that had NFL standards, then the Rose Bowl would be torn down.
LikeLike
Pingback: The Connection Between Star Wars and Big Ten TV Rights | FRANK THE TANK'S SLANT