N.C.A.A. Votes to Give Greater Autonomy to Richest Conferences

#27
#27
bamawriter said:
The only school that is still outside the Power 5 that I think could be a net gain would be BYU. For whatver reason, though, the Pac 12 and Big XII have kept the Cougars at an arm's length. I guess the LDS factor is a turn-off, though I really don't understand why.
Click to expand...

No sports on Sundays has been one of the big problems. Not a big deal for football but problematic for other sports.
 
#29
#29
Can someone explain this to me like I'm 5? I'm not exactly sure what this will mean in the future and I'm scared :(
 
#30
#30
TrueOrange said:
These conferences aren't going to add some school that doesn't bring anything to the table in terms of financial gains (mainly through large media markets not accessed by the conference already). All the conference expansion/realignment showed that.

After the last round of realignment, pretty much everyone still left over outside of the major 5 conferences is such because they just don't have that much to offer; they don't have anything that appeals to strengthening or increasing the revenue of any of those conferences. These guys don't want to have to cut their own pie into more pieces if said pie isn't going to get larger as well...they're not really going to try to swoop in and save any of these smaller schools at this point (really, unless they're in a position where they're forced one as some sort of saving move for themselves, I can't really see any of them adding many of the currently outside schools).


(Especially since the point of this move was to get a much smaller approval number needed for the 65 to take action on things; saving/adding more of the smaller schools just raises that number and would pretty much put everything right back where it was before.)
Click to expand...

I think we're thinking the same thing just hard to express it all in one post. But I agree with what you're saying.
 
#31
#31
Catbone said:
Can someone explain this to me like I'm 5? I'm not exactly sure what this will mean in the future and I'm scared :(
Click to expand...

The Power 5 conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big XII, Pac 12, and SEC) will no longer have to seek approval from the Group of 5 conferences (AAC, CUSA, MAC, Mountain West, and Sun Belt) on issues related to college football.

This will mostly effect how money can be spent. For instance: until now, FBS teams were only allowed to have a certain number of training tables in their facilities. Now, the Power 5 could vote to allow their programs to have as many training tables as they'd like without needing any of the Group of 5 schools to sign off on that change.
 
#32
#32
bamawriter said:
The Power 5 conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big XII, Pac 12, and SEC) will no longer have to seek approval from the Group of 5 conferences (AAC, CUSA, MAC, Mountain West, and Sun Belt) on issues related to college football.

This will mostly effect how money can be spent. For instance: until now, FBS teams were only allowed to have a certain number of training tables in their facilities. Now, the Power 5 could vote to allow their programs to have as many training tables as they'd like without needing any of the Group of 5 schools to sign off on that change.
Click to expand...

Thanks man I appreciate it. What do you think about it?
 
#34
#34
Mike Slive said this recently...

"When the five conferences put together this vision it was BEFORE this litigation, it was BEFORE the unionization, but the substance of what we're trying to do in this so called autonomy, is in effect, what's being asked for, both in the Northwestern union issue and in the litigation, in many ways."

"What we want to do is simply and solely, and the cynics I think have a hard time accepting this, is to create a system that benefits student athletes.

"A simple example, if your son or daughter is playing for the national championship in college football and you can't afford to go, we would like to make it possible for those parents to go. That's the nature of what we are trying to do."

http://fsvideoprod.edgesuite.net/video/Fox_Sports_Production/981/779/APG_MIKE_SLIVE_CONVO_V2_600.mp4


Mr. Slive has been a great leader for our conference, but it's really hard NOT to be a cynic when looking at these comments. Even if I shrug off the comment about a daughter playing in the football championship and assume he means this change would apply to women's basketball, would it apply to the softball player is anyone's guess, the rest doesn't seem all that genuine.

He seems to be saying he could see this all coming before the litigation/unionization and I don't have any doubt he did. The things he and some of the other conference commissioners are saying is , quite frankly, common sense stuff.

Health care for student athletes, four year scholarships, the ability to return to school and finish a degree, cost of attendance...any school could have stepped up and done any of those things at any time, some did, the vast majority did not.

Now they figure, if they make these concessions across the board, people will be satisfied. The question is and remains, why should folks believe you now after resisting change for so long?

If Slive is saying that what folks are suing them for is essentially what he's been fighting for too, then why is the NCAA likely to fight O'Bannon all the way to the Supreme Court? Most university officials recognize they went too far in exploiting the players names, likenesses and images, most recognize that selling a jersey that represents a player while the player can't make anything from the same jersey is a morally bankrupt concept.

This is not complicated stuff at the core and this seems like a last digit effort to save some face before the courts and maybe even congress force them to get their collective act together.
 
#36
#36
bamawriter said:
The Power 5 conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big XII, Pac 12, and SEC) will no longer have to seek approval from the Group of 5 conferences (AAC, CUSA, MAC, Mountain West, and Sun Belt) on issues related to college football.

This will mostly effect how money can be spent. For instance: until now, FBS teams were only allowed to have a certain number of training tables in their facilities. Now, the Power 5 could vote to allow their programs to have as many training tables as they'd like without needing any of the Group of 5 schools to sign off on that change.
Click to expand...

I jumped the gun and responded inappropriately to this thread

Thanks for explaining it
 
#39
#39
bamawriter said:
The Power 5 conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big XII, Pac 12, and SEC) will no longer have to seek approval from the Group of 5 conferences (AAC, CUSA, MAC, Mountain West, and Sun Belt) on issues related to college football.

This will mostly effect how money can be spent. For instance: until now, FBS teams were only allowed to have a certain number of training tables in their facilities. Now, the Power 5 could vote to allow their programs to have as many training tables as they'd like without needing any of the Group of 5 schools to sign off on that change.
Click to expand...

This is the way it should be. They never should have watered down division 1 by letting in the MTSU's of the world.
 
#42
#42
Big 5 is about to look like Minor league baseball but with a lot more money being thrown around.
 
#44
#44
bamawriter said:
The smaller schools are broke, while the big one's aren't. Now the schools that aren't broke don't have to be restrained by those that are.
Click to expand...


Some of the big ones are not broke, financially, many of them need subsidies and don't carry their own weight.

The money is only one aspect of it in terms being broke.

Do all of the 65 give four year scholarships? Do all of them support the idea? The answer is no... to both. That includes UT, BTW.
 
#45
#45
Stipends? Players wear the best addidas soon to be nike gear. They get housing and get fed the best with access if hungry 24/7 as Mosley I believe it is that get's up at 2:30 to eat just to keep his weight. They get free education if they want it and a foot in any door in knoxville if they don't make the nfl. Our culture of entitlement has run amuck. I don't think that college football needs fixing but that's just me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#46
#46
I hate to see it to be honest. I like the COLLEGE part of the college game. It's almost unrecognizable now, and this will probably finish it off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#47
#47
24/7vol said:
Stipends? Players wear the best addidas soon to be nike gear. They get housing and get fed the best with access if hungry 24/7 as Mosley I believe it is that get's up at 2:30 to eat just to keep his weight. They get free education if they want it and a foot in any door in knoxville if they don't make the nfl. Our culture of entitlement has run amuck. I don't think that college football needs fixing but that's just me.
Click to expand...

Stipends is an old idea, they use to have them, they took them away...same with the four year scholarship, that used to be the norm but coaches wanted more control and going to a one year renewable gave that to them.

At the core of all of this is going to be rights of the athletes. Whether it's insurance with a reasonable deductible or acknowledging the NCAA can't own for a players lifetime, his or her name, likeness and image.
 
#48
#48
bamawriter said:
The smaller schools are broke, while the big one's aren't. Now the schools that aren't broke don't have to be restrained by those that are.
Click to expand...

Let's say, SEC schools can spend however much money they want and have as much stuff as they want..

Would that be fair to Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Miss. St.?
 
#49
#49
bamawriter said:
The Power 5 conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big XII, Pac 12, and SEC) will no longer have to seek approval from the Group of 5 conferences (AAC, CUSA, MAC, Mountain West, and Sun Belt) on issues related to college football.

This will mostly effect how money can be spent. For instance: until now, FBS teams were only allowed to have a certain number of training tables in their facilities. Now, the Power 5 could vote to allow their programs to have as many training tables as they'd like without needing any of the Group of 5 schools to sign off on that change.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this also opens them up to be able to vote on things like stipends for student athletes on their own, does it not?

If so, it seems like that's going to split this wide open between the power 5 and the smaller schools as far as getting student athletes go. Same with basketball. The gap's going to get too big for any of the smaller schools to reasonably compete, if so.
 
#50
#50
vol66 said:
Stipends is an old idea, they use to have them, they took them away...same with the four year scholarship, that used to be the norm but coaches wanted more control and going to a one year renewable gave that to them.

At the core of all of this is going to be rights of the athletes. Whether it's insurance with a reasonable deductible or acknowledging the NCAA can't own for a players lifetime, his or her name, likeness and image.
Click to expand...

I do agree about the insurance but other than that we just have different opinions. I respect yours and you make good points.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top