2029

[xudash]

We've made it to June. It's getting hot. It's also "dead time" in college hoops. So, why not chew on 2 seriously important questions:

What does college basketball look like in five years?

What will the Big East look like within that landscape in five years?

Participate. Don't participate. What are your thoughts? What's your gut reaction to these questions? What key assumptions delivered you to your responses?

Yes, there are a lot of moving parts, but that's what makes the exercise interesting. I think it would be interesting to be able to read some of the thinking around here.

By any measure, the Big East has proven to be successful since its reboot. The brand is strong. We have a new media agreement coming up. The portal and NIL have made their presence felt, and maybe (most likely) direct pay is around the corner. Now we are facing an unbalanced "retribution" for past transgressions against student-athletes. And there always is the reality of the P2 and where they're taking football and college sports along with it.

What are your thoughts?

[drudy23]

I just hope they change the pretzels back to the old ones by then.

[GoMuskies]

I don't have anything helpful to contribute other than this is a pretty fun question given that no one in 2019 would have predicted the pandemic and the havoc it caused or the transfer portal or NIL or the fact that USC and UCLA would be in the Big Ten in 2024. On the other hand, if you asked this question in 2014 and said everything would generally be about the same in 2019, you'd have been right.

[paulxu]

I hope the BE gets a good media agreement, and retains MSG.
Since I favor the round robin, not interested in expansion; but given what's going on, that's probably a false hope.

[Strange Brew]

Chaos theory. :)

Joking aside. I can see College sports as we know it ending by turning off its fan base and/or a split to where there are Minor League systems for basketball/football and College sports become similar to the Ivy League. No “sports” scholarships however tuition breaks for those that are as academically qualified as legacies and other valued individuals (like some actors/actresses). Nothing wrong with either btw.

That said, MLB is not a big fan of funding the minors.

So like 99 out of 100 answers to questions. It will come down to money.

[Xville]

I have no freaking clue lol. However, I’m hoping they become employees, there is a cba, and that most other sports can survive outside of football/basketball.

I don’t see how this Wild West thing can survive the way it’s currently constructed. I’d guess in 2029, things are going to look pretty different than where they are now. That’s all I got

[Strange Brew]

I have no freaking clue lol. However, I’m hoping they become employees, there is a cba, and that most other sports can survive outside of football/basketball.

I don’t see how this Wild West thing can survive the way it’s currently constructed. I’d guess in 2029, things are going to look pretty different than where they are now. That’s all I got

Serious question. Is a full ride scholarship not enough of a compensation?

If you want to be an employee for sports. Be one. If you want to use athletics for an education. Do it.

[Xville]

Serious question. Is a full ride scholarship not enough of a compensation?

If you want to be an employee for sports. Be one. If you want to use athletics for an education. Do it.

What I think doesn’t matter, but the fact is that it’s not anymore.

I think it’s utterly ridiculous for fans and alums to have to pay these guys directly. Schools, ncaa, conferences etc are the one who should be footing the bill, but again my thoughts don’t matter.

[Strange Brew]

What I think doesn’t matter, but the fact is that it’s not anymore.

I’d hate to think I’m old school when I’m more than a half decade away from my AARP card eligibility. :)

[X-band '01]

Thanks for reminding me that I'm also less than 5 years away from being eligible for senior discounts at Reds games.

[xubrew]

The sooner the NCAA does what it needs to so they stop getting killed in litigation, the more likely it is that there will be long term stability. The schools with big time football programs don't need the NCAA and they know it. If the NCAA and/or the rest of the D1 membership tries to do something that they don't like or agree with, they may just leave. If the NCAA and/or the rest of the D1 membership tries to stop them from doing something they want to do, they may just leave. What are the chances that happens in the next five years??

[Strange Brew]

Thanks for reminding me that I'm also less than 5 years away from being eligible for senior discounts at Reds games.

Does it include beer?

If not. What’s the point? This is America right? ;)

[Strange Brew]

The sooner the NCAA does what it needs to so they stop getting killed in litigation, the more likely it is that there will be long term stability. The schools with big time football programs don't need the NCAA and they know it. If the NCAA and/or the rest of the D1 membership tries to do something that they don't like or agree with, they may just leave. If the NCAA and/or the rest of the D1 membership tries to stop them from doing something they want to do, they may just leave. What are the chances that happens in the next five years??

Yep. Time for the NFL to stop bleeding the Colleges. Start a minor league system already! Love to see Roger try to manage that however I’d be all for Condi Rice running it. It’s her dream. She’s an awesome person and woman.

[xubrew]

Yep. Time for the NFL to stop bleeding the Colleges. Start a minor league system already! Love to see Roger try to manage that however I’d be all for Condi Rice running it. It’s her dream. She’s an awesome person and woman.

The schools with big time football programs are thriving. The NFL isn’t bleeding them at all. In fact in a lot of places (not most, but a lot) college football is actually bigger than the NFL.

[Strange Brew]

The schools with big time football programs are thriving. The NFL isn’t bleeding them at all. In fact in a lot of places (not most, but a lot) college football is actually bigger than the NFL.

The NFL Network contract is worth, last I checked $110B dollars (just the TV rights). It can afford its own system for paying players.

Edit: Bread and Circus…haha.

It’s off the rails. 10 years ago the contract was only worth $500M. Good luck people.

[xubrew]

The NFL Network contract is worth, last I checked $110B dollars (just the TV rights). It can afford its own system for paying players.

Yeah, it CAN. But it’s not at all taxing on the colleges with major programs that one doesn’t exist. In fact most colleges would prefer that it didn’t exist because a lot of the top players would opt for that instead of college. They’re not being bled by the NFL at all.

This will be the first year of the 12 team college playoff. It will be interesting to see what kind of ratings it gets. It’s going to be $1.3 billion a year. There are only 11 games. That’s $200 million more per year than the basketball contract, and it’s 56 fewer games. After five years of that, where the contract may get even bigger, will basketball even matter to those schools?? Does it even matter all that much now?? I mean, if it did, I would think UConn would be getting invites from the Big Ten or SEC. But, they’re not. In two or three years will they look to branch off from the NCAA and negotiate an even bigger TV deal and keep it all for themselves?? And while they’re doing this, will the NCAA still be in the perpetual purgation they’ve been in all this time?

[Strange Brew]

Yeah, it CAN. But it’s not at all taxing on the colleges with major programs that one doesn’t exist. In fact most colleges would prefer that it didn’t exist because a lot of the top players would opt for that instead of college. They’re not being bled by the NFL at all.

This will be the first year of the 12 team college playoff. It will be interesting to see what kind of ratings it gets. It’s going to be $1.3 billion a year. There are only 11 games. That’s $200 million more per year than the basketball contract, and it’s 56 fewer games. After five years of that, where the contract may get even bigger, will basketball even matter to those schools?? Does it even matter all that much now?? I mean, if it did, I would think UConn would be getting invites from the Big Ten or SEC. But, they’re not. In two or three years will they look to branch off from the NCAA and negotiate an even bigger TV deal and keep it all for themselves?? And while they’re doing this, will the NCAA still be in the perpetual purgation they’ve been in all this time?

Football is a fickle a terrible beast (I was going to use a different term) that can end a man in a second.

Let the NFL pay for their minor league system. As you said, they can.

And leave the door open to athletes who may need it for an education.

Luckily, I didn’t. However I know people who have.

[xubrew]

Football is a fickle a terrible beast (I was going to use a different term) that can end a man in a second.

Let the NFL pay for their minor league system. As you said, they can.

And leave the door open to athletes who may need it for an education.

Luckily, I didn’t. However I know people who have.

Why would the NFL want to do that? And why would the colleges who are making as much money as they are off of football want them to do that?

One of the things I’m pretty sure we will not see in 2029 is an NFL funded minor league.

[Strange Brew]

Why would the NFL want to do that? And why would the colleges who are making as much money as they are off of football want them to do that?

One of the things I’m pretty sure we will not see in 2029 is an NFL funded minor league.

You’re right. They wouldn’t. Why should Academia absorb the costs?

[xubrew]

You’re right. They wouldn’t. Why should Academia absorb the costs?

Because it is absolutely worth it to the schools with major football programs. Because they make way more revenue than what they spend. Because they would very much prefer their not be a minor league that may entice top level players from not playing in college. If you were to poll all the schools in the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and Big 12 as to whether or not they wand the NFL to finance a minor league, I’d bet literally all of them would say they didn’t want it.

[Strange Brew]

Because it is absolutely worth it to the schools with major football programs. Because they make way more revenue than what they spend. Because they would very much prefer their not be a minor league that may entice top level players from not playing in college. If you were to poll all the schools in the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and Big 12 as to whether or not they wand the NFL to finance a minor league, I’d bet literally all of them would say they didn’t want it.

Worth it for whom? The athlete?

[xubrew]

Worth it for whom? The athlete?

It’s worth it for the schools.

What are you trying to say? How is the NFL “bleeding” the colleges? The NFL is certainly BENEFITTING from it, but so are the colleges with big time programs. Those schools don’t want an NFL funded minor league. They want all the good players to play for them. For the 60ish schools that make up the power conferences, they will likely continue to monetize football as much as they can. So much so that I wonder if before 2029 they’ll decide they can make more money on their own than they can as members of the NCAA.

I don't think the SEC and Big Ten really need the rest of the NCAA. They could survive just fine playing against just themselves. That's even more true if more (or even all) from the ACC and Big 12 jump on board. And, that's the REAL power that they have. The power to leave the NCAA and everyone else behind and not miss it. If things don't go how they want them to go, they can just leave and the NCAA will miss them a lot more than they'll miss the NCAA.

[Strange Brew]

It’s worth it for the schools.

What are you trying to say? How is the NFL “bleeding” the colleges? The NFL is certainly BENEFITTING from it, but so are the colleges with big time programs. Those schools don’t want an NFL funded minor league. They want all the good players to play for them. For the 60ish schools that make up the power conferences, they will likely continue to monetize football as much as they can. So much so that I wonder if before 2029 they’ll decide they can make more money on their own than they can as members of the NCAA.

I don't think the SEC and Big Ten really need the rest of the NCAA. They could survive just fine playing against just themselves. That's even more true if more (or even all) from the ACC and Big 12 jump on board. And, that's the REAL power that they have. The power to leave the NCAA and everyone else behind and not miss it. If things don't go how they want them to go, they can just leave and the NCAA will miss them a lot more than they'll miss the NCAA.

Schools? Keep telling yourself that. I’m not a total asshole however , I’ve personally seen this movie.

[xubrew]

Schools? Keep telling yourself that. I’m not a total asshole however , I’ve personally seen this movie.

Is it your belief that the colleges are being exploited by the NFL and that they'd much prefer it if the NFL had their own minor league that some of the top players would play in instead of playing for a major college program?? Is that REALLY what you think?

I don't even know what to make about the above statement. Just how many drinks have you had tonight??

[Strange Brew]

Is it your belief that the colleges are being exploited by the NFL and that they'd much prefer it if the NFL had their own minor league that some of the top players would play in instead of playing for a major college program?? Is that REALLY what you think?

I don't even know what to make about the above statement. Just how many drinks have you had tonight??

Yes. As it pertains to your first sentence

I’m growing more concerned about yourr defense of the NFL.

Edit: That first run on sentence would’ve had you you thrown out of AP English.

[Strange Brew]

Did you play the game XUBREW?

Honest question and no, flag is not the same.

[xubrew]

Yes. As it pertains to your first sentence (no period!)

I’m growing more concerned about yourr defense of the NFL.

Edit: That first run on sentence would’ve had you you thrown out of AP English.

Well luckily we aren't in an AP English class.

What makes you think that??

I'm not defending the NFL. Point to anything I've said that defends the NFL. I can't even remember the last NFL game I watched. I'm simply stating that colleges with big time football programs don't want a minor league, and they don't. They would actually see such a league as competition instead of an asset.

[xubrew]

Did you play the game XUBREW?

Honest question and no, flag is not the same.

Played? No. But I've been around and dealt with college athletic administrators for almost twenty years, and I can say for certain that they don't feel the NFL is exploiting them and they would not like the idea of an NFL affiliated minor league that would take some of the top players away from the major programs. Especially if it's their own.

[Strange Brew]

Well luckily we aren't in an AP English class.

What makes you think that??

I'm not defending the NFL. Point to anything I've said that defends the NFL. I can't even remember the last NFL game I watched. I'm simply stating that colleges with big time football programs don't want a minor league, and they don't. They would actually see such a league as competition instead of an asset.

You left out a very key point. That is, did you play the game?

I’ll except no as an answer.

[xubrew]

you left out a very key point. That is, did you play the game?

I’ll except no as an answer.

i answered your question!!!


played? No. But i've been around and dealt with college athletic administrators for almost twenty years, and i can say for certain that they don't feel the nfl is exploiting them and they would not like the idea of an nfl affiliated minor league that would take some of the top players away from the major programs. Especially if it's their own.

[Strange Brew]

i answered your question!!!

So no and you didn’t.

[Xville]

Another thing i'll add...i think there is a greater than 50% chance that the NCAA doesn't exist in 2029.

[xubrew]

Another thing i'll add...i think there is a greater than 50% chance that the NCAA doesn't exist in 2029.

I think it will EXIST in some form or fashion, but what I do think is that there is a greater than 50% that many of the key players won't be a part of it anymore.

This is a soccer reference, but every now and then you hear rumblings about how UEFA (essentially Europe) will break off from FIFA. They hate FIFA, they don't need them, and they can just do their own thing, and make the Euros their own World Cup (which it already sort of is), and exist just fine on their own. I think that's kind of how the SEC and Big Ten feel. Perhaps even moreso. And, they may decide to break off from the NCAA and take a few other football powers with them. We'll have about 50-60 schools that form a virtual U-23(ish) professional type of college sports that's no longer part of the NCAA.

How will the new 12 team CFP Playoff go? Will it make them think "Not only do we not need the NCAA anymore, we'd actually be better off without them." It might.

[MHettel]

I believe the NIL and the Transfer portal will expose the competitive balance issues related to money / funding between the "have's" and "have nots."

I think the football being played at the highest levels, which now consists of just over 100 teams (FCS), will be narrowed down to around 60 teams and the ones that dont make the cut will be irrelevant and may not exist at all. FBS might exist in some fashion, but it will seem like more of a club sport. The 40ish current FCS teams that dont make the inner circle of 60 have the most to lose and will either need to drop to FBS or essentially starve. ALL of the money to be made in college football will be enjoyed by the "select 60".

Whether its the NCAA or some other entity that governs the 60 FB schools remains to be seen. The NCAA better go on the offensive NOW to emerge as the best option, because I'm guessing there are multiple alternatives being planned as we speak.

As far as basketball, it probably will look more similar to what we have today than football will. I can see the "select 60" teams splitting for Football for sure, but i'd say 70% chance they still engage with the "rest" of the current 360 basketball teams.

I think paying players & the portal for basketball will absolutely result in a bigger competition gap than what currently exists. There already is a huge gap between the "Duke's" of the world and the "Duquesne's" of the world. Players will be less inclined to leave college for money and talent will consolidate at the schools with the biggest budgets.

As far as the BE, id give it a 50% chance of looking like it does today. I'd say 25% chance of expansion, 25% chance of extinction. The reason i'm worried about extinction is that if the "select 60' split from the NCAA for football, there becomes a real question about the viability of the NCAA without football, AND the possibility that the Select 60 pull their basketball as well. If thats the case.....then game over for everyone else. I suppose they could add some selected top BBall programs to the Select 60 (leaving their football behind). Take Duke as an example. Would they sacrifice their football program for inclusion of their BBall program in a new "league" that has maybe 100 teams? As unsavory as that feels, its a whole lot better than exisiting in an NCAA that cant fund football and now is missing 60 of the better basketball programs.

If you need a catalyst, it's the ACC. As the legal discussions about the ability to enforce the Grant of rights and the related buyout costs heat up, more teams in the ACC seem to have the wandering eye. Clemson, FSU, UNC, and probably Miami could all land safely and easily in of the the more stable conferences (B1G & SEC). The Big 12 could take some scraps as well, but I dont think they are stable. the big 12 went for "quantity over quality" as their expansion strategy, and I'm not sure that they survive as an entity once the "select 60" occurs.

Anyway, the ACC meltdown will occur within 24 months. That will explode and the current ACC teams will wind up scattered across 4 or 5 other conferences. I dont see a scenario where the ACC blows up and then tried to recruit other schools to backfill. That ship is sunk.

I would be absolutely shocked if the College landscape looks anything like the current state 5 years from now.

[xudash]

A critical pivot point could - most likely will - involve the fracturing of the ACC once FSU, Clemson, UNC and (?) find an exit ramp from that conference. The remaining conference for football will be a shell of its former self, but they'll have no choice but to go in survival mode.

What does that look like, and what does that mean for the Big East?

Right off the bat, my guess would be that Stanford and Cal would go home. They'll have little interest in flying their football teams cross-country to play the likes of Wake Forest and BC. SMU would stay put, because that will be the best they can do at that point anyway. So, the ACC would end up looking like:

BC
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Miami
NC State
Pitt
SMU
Syracuse
VA Tech
Wake Forest

What kind of media agreement money is that group looking at moving forward? My gut reaction tells me that they couldn't fetch over $20 million per school per year. Sure, they would enjoy exit fees from the departing schools, and they would have more NCAAT Units monies to divide amongst themselves, but both of those sources of cash would dry up comparatively quickly in a world where the B1G and SEC are bombing along at $70mm+ per school per year.

Would they go after UCONN? That depends upon whether or not the media partner says that UCONN is worth $20 million per year in that group.

How much of that $20 million is assigned to basketball value? $5mm? $7mm? Basketball would be solid, but we all know all of this is driven by football anyway.

With all of this as a possible outcome, could it be possible for the weakened ACC to come after a few BE schools to bolster its strength in basketball, knowing that its options for improving football are bleak? If the BE ends up with a media agreement that is worth $7mm+ per school per year, why move to that unstable ACC mess. After all, what precludes the Big XII from poaching the remaining better football programs in that group. UCONN probably would go if it in fact could secure $20mm per year from such a move, but that's just not a given at this point - UCONN football is terrible.

If the Big East can survive the downfall of the ACC and otherwise get to a media agreement that provides $7mm+ or more per school, we will at least be better positioned to go back to a one flank war where the battlefield involves the machinations of the B1G and SEC.

As a key backdrop point in all of this, I truly cannot comprehend ANYONE anywhere thinking that it would be a good idea to destroy the NCAAT as it presently exists. Xavier can certainly find a way forward with $7mm+ per year in media money and with the cash register that is the Cintas Center.

[MHettel]

A critical pivot point could - most likely will - involve the fracturing of the ACC once FSU, Clemson, UNC and (?) find an exit ramp from that conference. The remaining conference for football will be a shell of its former self, but they'll have no choice but to go in survival mode.

What does that look like, and what does that mean for the Big East?

Right off the bat, my guess would be that Stanford and Cal would go home. They'll have little interest in flying their football teams cross-country to play the likes of Wake Forest and BC. SMU would stay put, because that will be the best they can do at that point anyway. So, the ACC would end up looking like:

BC
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Miami
NC State
Pitt
SMU
Syracuse
VA Tech
Wake Forest

What kind of media agreement money is that group looking at moving forward? My gut reaction tells me that they couldn't fetch over $20 million per school per year. Sure, they would enjoy exit fees from the departing schools, and they would have more NCAAT Units monies to divide amongst themselves, but both of those sources of cash would dry up comparatively quickly in a world where the B1G and SEC are bombing along at $70mm+ per school per year.

Would they go after UCONN? That depends upon whether or not the media partner says that UCONN is worth $20 million per year in that group.

How much of that $20 million is assigned to basketball value? $5mm? $7mm? Basketball would be solid, but we all know all of this is driven by football anyway.

With all of this as a possible outcome, could it be possible for the weakened ACC to come after a few BE schools to bolster its strength in basketball, knowing that its options for improving football are bleak? If the BE ends up with a media agreement that is worth $7mm+ per school per year, why move to that unstable ACC mess. After all, what precludes the Big XII from poaching the remaining better football programs in that group. UCONN probably would go if it in fact could secure $20mm per year from such a move, but that's just not a given at this point - UCONN football is terrible.

If the Big East can survive the downfall of the ACC and otherwise get to a media agreement that provides $7mm+ or more per school, we will at least be better positioned to go back to a one flank war where the battlefield involves the machinations of the B1G and SEC.

As a key backdrop point in all of this, I truly cannot comprehend ANYONE anywhere thinking that it would be a good idea to destroy the NCAAT as it presently exists. Xavier can certainly find a way forward with $7mm+ per year in media money and with the cash register that is the Cintas Center.

you left out Duke?

[xudash]

you left out Duke?

Ha! Wow. I wonder what that means.

I totally agree with you that the ACC is not stable. Most likely outcomes do not favor it.

The consensus down here in SEC and ACC country is that Miami's time has passed. The only time they fill their rented stadium is when the Gators and FSU show up with their fans. People may say that the Miami market is too big to ignore, but the core support for the Hurricanes just does not stack up to what you find in the SEC and B1G stadiums.

[xubrew]

I believe the NIL and the Transfer portal will expose the competitive balance issues related to money / funding between the "have's" and "have nots."

I think the football being played at the highest levels, which now consists of just over 100 teams (FCS), will be narrowed down to around 60 teams and the ones that dont make the cut will be irrelevant and may not exist at all. FBS might exist in some fashion, but it will seem like more of a club sport. The 40ish current FCS teams that dont make the inner circle of 60 have the most to lose and will either need to drop to FBS or essentially starve. ALL of the money to be made in college football will be enjoyed by the "select 60".

Whether its the NCAA or some other entity that governs the 60 FB schools remains to be seen. The NCAA better go on the offensive NOW to emerge as the best option, because I'm guessing there are multiple alternatives being planned as we speak.

Do not count on this happening. It almost assuredly won't.

Something the NCAA needs to realize, but doesn't....

If schools will leave their current conferences for what they feel is a better opportunity, even if they've been in said conference for 50+ years, they'll also leave the NCAA for what they feel is a better opportunity. At some point before 2029, does the Big Ten, SEC, and a few others feel that leaving the NCAA is a better opportunity?? It's not impossible. It's not guaranteed, but the chances of it happening are probably upwards of 50 percent.

[xubrew]

I've slowly come to realize that what I liked the most about college sports, and college basketball in particular, doesn't matter to most people. It's not what's valued by those who are in positions of power.

Traditional rivalries don't matter. Tons of them have ended in the last decade or so.

Regional rivalries and opponents don't matter either. A lot of teams that could create a great deal of interest from playing each other simply don't play.

Tradition doesn't matter.

All conferences having a path to NCAA Championships doesn't matter.

Working to create compelling regular season showcases and match-ups doesn't matter. In fact if a team from outside a major conference is particularly good, they can't even get anyone to play them. There were years where teams like SFA, and just this past year McNeese State, couldn't even fill out their schedules even though they basically offered to go on the road and play a P5 team for no money.

And I'm now starting to think that college basketball in and of itself doesn't matter. It's an afterthought. It's an Olympic sport that makes money, which is nice, but it's not football. It's not important enough to the SEC, Big Ten, and other Power programs to stick around and remain in the NCAA for. The "Select 60" as someone called it can just play amongst themselves and completely detach from the other non-select 300.

People say they love college athletics because it's all about the love of the game. In reality, it's LESS about the game than any other major sports organization on Earth. If it really were about the game, then rivalries like Oklahoma v Oklahoma State wouldn't be ending. And neither would about a hundred other rivalries that have ended or will end.

[JTG]

The NCAA doesn't really control D1 football now do they? I thought the CFP controlled D1 football and reaped all the Bowl money. I could see the top 60 football teams splitting off for football only. And remaining in the NCAA for other sports. In fact football should have split off 5 years ago, and most of this crazy expansion would have been avoided.

[UCGRAD4X]

I've slowly come to realize that what I liked the most about college sports, and college basketball in particular, doesn't matter to most people. It's not what's valued by those who are in positions of power.

Traditional rivalries don't matter. Tons of them have ended in the last decade or so.

Regional rivalries and opponents don't matter either. A lot of teams that could create a great deal of interest from playing each other simply don't play.

Tradition doesn't matter.

All conferences having a path to NCAA Championships doesn't matter.

Working to create compelling regular season showcases and match-ups doesn't matter. In fact if a team from outside a major conference is particularly good, they can't even get anyone to play them. There were years where teams like SFA, and just this past year McNeese State, couldn't even fill out their schedules even though they basically offered to go on the road and play a P5 team for no money.

And I'm now starting to think that college basketball in and of itself doesn't matter. It's an afterthought. It's an Olympic sport that makes money, which is nice, but it's not football. It's not important enough to the SEC, Big Ten, and other Power programs to stick around and remain in the NCAA for. The "Select 60" as someone called it can just play amongst themselves and completely detach from the other non-select 300.

People say they love college athletics because it's all about the love of the game. In reality, it's LESS about the game than any other major sports organization on Earth. If it really were about the game, then rivalries like Oklahoma v Oklahoma State wouldn't be ending. And neither would about a hundred other rivalries that have ended or will end.

No doubt it is no longer about ANY of the things you mentioned.

It is only about one thing and one thing only.

[waggy]

With the house settlement I think the p4 have to stick around until it runs its course, right?

[xubrew]

With the house settlement I think the p4 have to stick around until it runs its course, right?

I'm not aware of any part of the settlement that would prevent any schools from leaving the NCAA. That was never stipulated.

[waggy]

I'm not aware of any part of the settlement that would prevent any schools from leaving the NCAA. That was never stipulated.

I would think the conferences are committed. Doesn’t mean they couldn’t take football separate.

[xubrew]

I would think the conferences are committed. Doesn’t mean they couldn’t take football separate.

The conferences are committed to paying their share of the settlement. Neither they or the schools are committed to remaining in the NCAA if they choose to leave and form some sort of 'College Elite Athletics League' or whatever the hell they'd decide to call it.

EDIT: you know the truth?? I'm not even sure the NCAA has has correctly stipulated that among the membership. If a school leaves from one conference to another, or a conference just folds, or if schools/conferences just decide to leave altogether, then what happens to their share of the settlement?? I don't think they've stipulated for that.

[xubrew]

I would think the conferences are committed. Doesn’t mean they couldn’t take football separate.

I ultimately think football should be separated from everything else. I think it would be a much better world if it were. I just don't see it happening. They CAN do it if they want to, but I just don't think they will. The power football schools will either remain in the NCAA completely, or if they leave they will leave completely. I'm not saying it isn't POSSIBLE, but (and it is just my own opinion) I don't think it's very probable that they'd separate football out and remain NCAA members in everything else.

I like college football, but given how much carnage has resulted because of it, I could actually do without it. The classic ACC and Big East conferences were arguably two of the most exciting sports conferences of all time. But, rather than be happy with that, both were basically ruined because of what amounted to football exclusive agendas. All of the schools with power football programs that were once part of the Big East (Miami, Syracuse, West Virginia, VA Tech, BC, Louisville, etc) all have one thing in common. They all left the schools without power football programs behind. Even though what they had in basketball was arguably as good as it could possibly be. For Syracuse, remaining in a conference with Georgetown and UConn wasn't important. Football was. As great as those rivalries and that tradition was, football was more important to them.

And, I could go on and on and on, but that's really the crux of it. Those 60ish schools will leave if they think doing so is a better opportunity for them. They'll leave everyone else without power football behind. That's how it's been for the last twenty years. Perhaps it's been that way for even longer.

[xudash]

I ultimately think football should be separated from everything else. I think it would be a much better world if it were. I just don't see it happening. They CAN do it if they want to, but I just don't think they will. The power football schools will either remain in the NCAA completely, or if they leave they will leave completely. I'm not saying it isn't POSSIBLE, but (and it is just my own opinion) I don't think it's very probable that they'd separate football out and remain NCAA members in everything else.

I like college football, but given how much carnage has resulted because of it, I could actually do without it. The classic ACC and Big East conferences were arguably two of the most exciting sports conferences of all time. But, rather than be happy with that, both were basically ruined because of what amounted to football exclusive agendas. All of the schools with power football programs that were once part of the Big East (Miami, Syracuse, West Virginia, VA Tech, BC, Louisville, etc) all have one thing in common. They all left the schools without power football programs behind. Even though what they had in basketball was arguably as good as it could possibly be. For Syracuse, remaining in a conference with Georgetown and UConn wasn't important. Football was. As great as those rivalries and that tradition was, football was more important to them.

And, I could go on and on and on, but that's really the crux of it. Those 60ish schools will leave if they think doing so is a better opportunity for them. They'll leave everyone else without power football behind. That's how it's been for the last twenty years. Perhaps it's been that way for even longer.

The landscape looked very different when those schools left the Big East back then. They were moving UP to what was considered a better, more stable conference, and one which enjoyed a relative status as a P5 along with the B1G, SEC, Pac 12 and Big 12 (i.e. the money disparity was not as pronounced as it is now).

Now they're in limbo land. They're virtually toast with respect to where this is heading. What does the AD at places like Syracuse, BC and Wake Forest see when they look out their office windows? They are shackled into an uncompetitive position vis-a-vis the B1G and SEC and, ironically, those particular schools need for that reality to continue as long as possible! They truly cannot afford to have FSU, Clemson, UNC and the like bail for a better situation with one of the P2. They need for Swofford's deal to run its course. Just imagine going from $40 million or so in media payouts per school per year to something in the neighborhood of $20 million prior to the mid 30's.

I'm also not so sure it's a clean break when it comes to 60 schools. We can go back to the oft stated point that not all these schools operate on equal financial footing. The University of Indiana could not possibly replicate what Ohio State does in terms of generating revenue for its athletic department. I don't care to look it up again, but I recall statements to the effect that perhaps 20 or so of these schools actually operate in the black athletically. Do you have an on campus stadium that seats 100,000 that you fill for every home game? You're most likely one of those 20. Wake Forest? BC? Syracuse? Baylor? TCU? Nope, not a chance.

You can see where this is headed. The "60" aren't on the same page with one another in a number of aspects, even though the behemoths among them are driving things.

Could they leave? I can't deny that possibility. Will they leave? I'm not so sure. Frankly, the payouts for the B1G and SEC schools have found or will soon find their high water marks, given the changes in media, etc. (i.e. streaming -v- cable). Nonetheless, that's 36 schools. You can't build interesting, sustainable, watchable schedules around 36 schools, and those 36 schools don't have much of an appetite for beating up on each other year in and year out.

If I'm the athletic director at Ohio State, Texas, Alabama, etc., and if I am a pure dick, then I'm after as much competitive imbalance as possible, but while managing to install and polish up a nice "veneer" of COLLEGE athletics, rah-rah, win one for the Gipper, band playing non-sense. The thing that is keeping me in check is the need for maintaining the perception of collegiate athletics.

Football is driving all of this.

But the market will dictate to football what it can actually push through, or not push through.

[xubrew]

The landscape looked very different when those schools left the Big East back then. They were moving UP to what was considered a better, more stable conference, and one which enjoyed a relative status as a P5 along with the B1G, SEC, Pac 12 and Big 12 (i.e. the money disparity was not as pronounced as it is now).

Now they're in limbo land. They're virtually toast with respect to where this is heading. What does the AD at places like Syracuse, BC and Wake Forest see when they look out their office windows? They are shackled into an uncompetitive position vis-a-vis the B1G and SEC and, ironically, those particular schools need for that reality to continue as long as possible! They truly cannot afford to have FSU, Clemson, UNC and the like bail for a better situation with one of the P2. They need for Swofford's deal to run its course. Just imagine going from $40 million or so in media payouts per school per year to something in the neighborhood of $20 million prior to the mid 30's.

I'm also not so sure it's a clean break when it comes to 60 schools. We can go back to the oft stated point that not all these schools operate on equal financial footing. The University of Indiana could not possibly replicate what Ohio State does in terms of generating revenue for its athletic department. I don't care to look it up again, but I recall statements to the effect that perhaps 20 or so of these schools actually operate in the black athletically. Do you have an on campus stadium that seats 100,000 that you fill for every home game? You're most likely one of those 20. Wake Forest? BC? Syracuse? Baylor? TCU? Nope, not a chance.

You can see where this is headed. The "60" aren't on the same page with one another in a number of aspects, even though the behemoths among them are driving things.

Could they leave? I can't deny that possibility. Will they leave? I'm not so sure. Frankly, the payouts for the B1G and SEC schools have found or will soon find their high water marks, given the changes in media, etc. (i.e. streaming -v- cable). Nonetheless, that's 36 schools. You can't build interesting, sustainable, watchable schedules around 36 schools, and those 36 schools don't have much of an appetite for beating up on each other year in and year out.

If I'm the athletic director at Ohio State, Texas, Alabama, etc., and if I am a pure dick, then I'm after as much competitive imbalance as possible, but while managing to install and polish up a nice "veneer" of COLLEGE athletics, rah-rah, win one for the Gipper, band playing non-sense. The thing that is keeping me in check is the need for maintaining the perception of collegiate athletics.

Football is driving all of this.

But the market will dictate to football what it can actually push through, or not push through.

This is kind of where I am. They can absolutely leave, but I'm not so sure they will.

I don't think the aspect of sustainable and interesting match-ups are that big of an issue. It's compelling enough, even if it is just those 36. And, my guess is that it will be somewhere between 40-50 (not quite 60, but I was just going with that since that's the figure someone else came up with) if there is a split.

As far as the high water marks for TV, that's important. HAVE they reached it yet?? Or, I guess more importantly, do THEY THINK they've reached it yet??

I think there's two key questions that they will be asking...

1) How much of this NCAA nonsense do we want to continue to deal with that we wouldn't have to deal with if we just left?

and

2) Hey networks! How much are we worth to you? How much would you pay for the 40-50 of us? How much for our football? and football playoffs? and basketball? and basketball tournament? And baseball? How much can we get from you? Can we get NFL levels of revenue?

They'll have plenty of appetite for only beating up on each other if the money is right. Hell, the vast majority of OOC games aren't very compelling or interesting now.

[xubrew]

I think the NCAA needs to take this seriously. I think they need to take it VERY seriously! What scares me is that if you look at the recent history of the NCAA, they don't have a very good track record of taking seriously (or even recognizing) the things they need to be taking seriously.

These schools may leave. Don't think it can't happen! It can! And as far as what college basketball will look like for everyone else if they do leave?? The spotlight won't be nearly as bright, and the greatest postseason that exists in the entire world (at least in my opinion) won't be nearly as big of a deal. The rest of the NCAA will be in their shadow.

[xudash]

This is kind of where I am. They can absolutely leave, but I'm not so sure they will.

I don't think the aspect of sustainable and interesting match-ups are that big of an issue. It's compelling enough, even if it is just those 36. And, my guess is that it will be somewhere between 40-50 (not quite 60, but I was just going with that since that's the figure someone else came up with) if there is a split.

As far as the high water marks for TV, that's important. HAVE they reached it yet?? Or, I guess more importantly, do THEY THINK they've reached it yet??

I think there's two key questions that they will be asking...

1) How much of this NCAA nonsense do we want to continue to deal with that we wouldn't have to deal with if we just left?

and

2) Hey networks! How much are we worth to you? How much would you pay for the 40-50 of us? How much for our football? and football playoffs? and basketball? and basketball tournament? And baseball? How much can we get from you? Can we get NFL levels of revenue?

They'll have plenty of appetite for only beating up on each other if the money is right. Hell, the vast majority of OOC games aren't very compelling or interesting now.

My gut reaction to the bolded question: HELL NO!

Anecdotal, but here you go:

OHIO POPULATION: The estimated population of Ohio in 2024 is 11.8 million


Ohio State
Alumni Association: More than 465,000 Ohio State alumni live in 157 countries, with 250,000 staying close to their alma mater by settling in Ohio.

The big one: Ohio State-Michigan matchup scored 19,065,000 viewers on FOX
�� Most-watched regular season college football game on any network since 2011
�� Most-watched regular season college football game in FOX Sports history
�� Peaked at 22,900,000 viewers on FOX

Something other than THE GAME: Ohio State's 2023 debut against Indiana set records for CBS this past weekend. According to CBS Sports, the "Big Ten on CBS" game was the network's most-watched Week 1 game in 25 years, averaging 4.646 million viewers and peaking with 5.711 million viewers.


BENGALS
JAGUARS-BENGALS IS MOST-WATCHED NFL NETWORK EXCLUSIVE THURSDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL GAME SINCE 2018
Total Viewership of 8.5 Million Across TV+Digital – Up +47% vs. 2020 Week 4 ‘Thursday Night Football’ Matchup
NFL Network Exclusive 3-Game TV+Digital Average of 8.1 Million
Viewers – Highest Since 2018

BROWNS
As you might expect, very few things can compete with the NFL when it comes to TV ratings. That was again the case this past Thursday when the Cleveland Browns took on the Pittsburgh Steelers.

The game, which the Browns won on their home turf 29-17, drew a 5.4 rating and an average audience of 11.03 million viewers on Amazon Prime. Of those numbers, 1.18 million viewers came from local simulcasts in Cleveland (631,000) and Pittsburgh (549,000), according to Nielsen.

- - - - - -

I did state that this stuff is anecdotal, but it also is revealing. A bit of a mishmash, but while THE GAME is going to hold its own against anything, it also is just one game, and we're otherwise talking about Ohio State here, which is at the top of the collegiate football food chain. As we begin to consider other programs and games that are as not as significant between those programs, their viewership numbers are not going to hold up against the NFL.

Finally, they may have an appetite for beating up on each other, but that doesn't mean that will translate to the viewing marketplace, which means that there may be some amount of elasticity dynamic going on here with respect to what they can and cannot extract via media agreements. If I am a fan of Oklahoma State football and you cut my legs off or damage my competitiveness to a material degree through your greed-based actions, thus making my program's ability to field a competitive team untenable, I doubt I'm going to casually watch your product as it takes place somewhere else in the country. The name on the jersey will always matter first and foremost, even though the amateur premise behind it is being bludgeoned to death.

Perhaps I am kidding myself or I am in denial, but I truly very seriously doubt that this collection of highly paid myopic idiots will ever arrive at a place where it is determined that the NCAAT - as it presently exists - is expendable.

Change is constant. We're always having to deal with something. You can pick any time period you like, but there will always be something that requires some careful navigation to make it through to the other side. I picked the next 5 years to discuss here, because I think it is a key period of time we have to find a way to manage through.

I see the NCAAT - "as is" - still being up and running when we get there, whether it adds teams or (doubtfully) boils down a little. I see the INCLUSIVE / DAVID V GOLIATH MODEL still being the best way to go for all involved, even as the competitive balance is tilted to the football factories.

Give me a strong new BE media agreement. Give me a wounded ACC that doesn't come after ANYONE in the BE. Give me one of truly finest on campus venues in the nation. Give me a fan base that has been built through generations over the past 45 years. We move forward from there.

BTW, all that is going on as Xavier continues to build a national reputation academically. Having a USN&WR ranking of 39th in the nation for best undergraduate teaching is one hell of a statement. And the shovels go into the ground this fall for the new medical school.

There is a lot at stake, but WOW if we make it successfully to the other side.

[xubrew]

Perhaps I am kidding myself or I am in denial, but I truly very seriously doubt that this collection of highly paid myopic idiots will ever arrive at a place where it is determined that the NCAAT - as it presently exists - is expendable

The contract for the CFP is larger than the contract for the NCAAT, and there are only 12 teams in it. So at least from a financial standpoint it is expendable.

Again, I think it boils down to two things. Can they get more money for themselves if they leave? And do they want to continue to have to deal with the NCAA (particularly its rules and revenue sharing)?

[xudash]

The contract for the CFP is larger than the contract for the NCAAT, and there are only 12 teams in it. So at least from a financial standpoint it is expendable.

Again, I think it boils down to two things. Can they get more money for themselves if they leave? And do they want to continue to have to deal with the NCAA (particularly its rules and revenue sharing)?

The contract for the CFP is larger than the contract for the NCAAT, and there are only 12 teams in it. - - My conclusion with this statement is that it takes pressure off their basketball related decisions. Besides, existing NCAAT Unit monies add up. And these guys are unquestionably greedy. Beyond that, we already know that football and basketball are different animals in all of this - direct comparisons of these contracts doesn't necessarily lead to the conclusion that the basketball contract is expendable.

I see your point, but I'm coming down on the other side of this. If I'm making a ton of money on the football side and the basketball side is accretive "as-is", I'm not sure I want or need to rock the boat by being party to killing the athletic departments of around 300 institutions, especially knowing that the per unit value of a revised basketball tournament featuring first round match ups between Wake Forest and Washington are not going to be as high as existing NCAAT Unit values.

They have always been solving for football. Basketball has been along for the ride, and they really don't have that much to complain about with how the basketball side of things has worked out and is working out.

[xubrew]

NCAA Tournament credits do add up, but they add up to tens of millions and not hundreds of millions. Every school that has moved conferences has decided it was worth walking away from. They felt that in the end, they'd ultimately end up with more money in the place they were going to. If they feel they can get more by leaving, then it increases the chances that they'll leave.. I know how the units work, I know how they're distributed, and I know how a lot of the P5 feels about it. After this year, I could easily see them saying "Hey, there are 12 teams in the CFP and we were 8 of them! Yet, we are sharing this with 130 other schools! We deserve more than what we're getting!" The P5 has twice tried to have the NCAA Tournament expanded to 96 teams, and they've griped about how they should have more teams in and that the auto-bids aren't fair.

They don't necessarily want to kill 300+ athletic departments, and they won't. Those schools will continue to have athletics and will continue to compete. But it's pretty clear to me that they'd rather not share with them. If the power schools leave, they'll still have a basketball season and a basketball tournament. They'll still have a Final Four (well, they'd have to call it something else, I guess, but they'd still do it), and they'd still have a TV deal. Maybe not as big of a deal overall, but they'd get it all for themselves. And they'd get all the football revenue for themselves.

If they feel they can get more, and on top of that not have to put up with the NCAA, they'll leave. They will not, for one second, care about ruining the current NCAA Tournament format or think of it as not being expendable. Why would they? After all, they've tried to ruin it before.

Like I said in an earlier post, much of what normal people love about college sports doesn't actually matter to the ones who have the power. And it sure as hell isn't "All About the Game." In college sports, a school or conference would much rather claim they are better and/or more deserving than someone else and then not play them, than they would to actually play them and/or have to deal with them. You see that ALL THE TIME. The Power programs aren't any different. If htey can leave, and say they're better without having to share with the rest of the NCAA, or play against the rest of the NCAA, AND make more money for themselves, then...hell yes they're going to leave.

[xudash]

NCAA Tournament credits do add up, but they add up to tens of millions and not hundreds of millions. Every school that has moved conferences has decided it was worth walking away from. They felt that in the end, they'd ultimately end up with more money in the place they were going to. If they feel they can get more by leaving, then it increases the chances that they'll leave.. I know how the units work, I know how they're distributed, and I know how a lot of the P5 feels about it. After this year, I could easily see them saying "Hey, there are 12 teams in the CFP and we were 8 of them! Yet, we are sharing this with 130 other schools! We deserve more than what we're getting!" The P5 has twice tried to have the NCAA Tournament expanded to 96 teams, and they've griped about how they should have more teams in and that the auto-bids aren't fair.

They don't necessarily want to kill 300+ athletic departments, and they won't. Those schools will continue to have athletics and will continue to compete. But it's pretty clear to me that they'd rather not share with them. If the power schools leave, they'll still have a basketball season and a basketball tournament. They'll still have a Final Four (well, they'd have to call it something else, I guess, but they'd still do it), and they'd still have a TV deal. Maybe not as big of a deal overall, but they'd get it all for themselves. And they'd get all the football revenue for themselves.

If they feel they can get more, and on top of that not have to put up with the NCAA, they'll leave. They will not, for one second, care about ruining the current NCAA Tournament format or think of it as not being expendable. Why would they? After all, they've tried to ruin it before.

Like I said in an earlier post, much of what normal people love about college sports doesn't actually matter to the ones who have the power. And it sure as hell isn't "All About the Game." In college sports, a school or conference would much rather claim they are better and/or more deserving than someone else and then not play them, than they would to actually play them and/or have to deal with them. You see that ALL THE TIME. The Power programs aren't any different. If htey can leave, and say they're better without having to share with the rest of the NCAA, or play against the rest of the NCAA, AND make more money for themselves, then...hell yes they're going to leave.

They are solving for football now. They have been solving for football for years. They will continue to solve when they have to solve based on solving for football.

Basketball is along for the ride, and I seriously doubt that there is a high level of frustration with the existing NCAA Tournament. Were they to go off and do their own thing in basketball, they will certainly achieve a reduced denominator, but the numerator is going to look very different from what it looks like today. There is no way around that. Bigness does not equate directly to more viewership, in this case. The bigness of the tournament comes from its inclusivity.

You also have serious political optics to deal with here.

Finally, these schools comprise the NCAA. They hold most of the power. They can reform what they want from within. It’s this simple: they have to balance greed with the need to retain some semblance of collegiate athletics.

[basket]

Since no one else is going to dip their toe into the water I will! UConn and Villanova will leave the Big East for football money! Possibly Marquette as well as they will be invited to join as long as they build a football stadium and start a program! Alumni and the University will be hard pressed to say "NO" to now Billions of dollars they will be paid to do this!!

The Big East will TRY to stay afloat by adding other East Coast, Midwest, yes UD and SLU, as well as West Coast Catholic schools to the mix! They WILL be successful at doing this as the SEC, Big 10 and the ACC will all be 1 Conference. The Big 12 and the rest of the NCAA Div. conferences will be "separate" form the "other" conferences. The Big East WILL dominate as they will get the former Pac 12 schools and the above mentioned Catholic schools out west, in the midwest and east coast!

That's my prediction for 2029!

[xudash]

Since no one else is going to dip their toe into the water I will! UConn and Villanova will leave the Big East for football money! Possibly Marquette as well as they will be invited to join as long as they build a football stadium and start a program! Alumni and the University will be hard pressed to say "NO" to now Billions of dollars they will be paid to do this!!

The Big East will TRY to stay afloat by adding other East Coast, Midwest, yes UD and SLU, as well as West Coast Catholic schools to the mix! They WILL be successful at doing this as the SEC, Big 10 and the ACC will all be 1 Conference. The Big 12 and the rest of the NCAA Div. conferences will be "separate" form the "other" conferences. The Big East WILL dominate as they will get the former Pac 12 schools and the above mentioned Catholic schools out west, in the midwest and east coast!

That's my prediction for 2029!

Thanks for diving in. That was one hell of a read.

[xubrew]

They are solving for football now. They have been solving for football for years. They will continue to solve when they have to solve based on solving for football.

Basketball is along for the ride, and I seriously doubt that there is a high level of frustration with the existing NCAA Tournament. Were they to go off and do their own thing in basketball, they will certainly achieve a reduced denominator, but the numerator is going to look very different from what it looks like today. There is no way around that. Bigness does not equate directly to more viewership, in this case. The bigness of the tournament comes from its inclusivity.

You also have serious political optics to deal with here.

Finally, these schools comprise the NCAA. They hold most of the power. They can reform what they want from within. It’s this simple: they have to balance greed with the need to retain some semblance of collegiate athletics.

Political optics. I can't help but laugh at this. One of the biggest mistakes the NCAA can (and likely will) make is thinking that political optics matter to the power football programs. It doesn't. Like...NOT AT ALL!

I agree that the bigness of the NCAA Tournament comes from its inclusivity, and that it will suck if it loses that. But I also don't think the schools we are talking about really see it that way, and even if they do they don't really care enough to not blow it up. They've blown up traditional rivalries, and entire conferences, and amateurism (not that that didn't need it), and anything else that happened to be collateral damage to the lining of their pockets, growing their power, and building their brand. They've never shown any concern or regard whatsoever to the political optics that come with wrecking a valued tradition. If they remain in the NCAA, then it will be for a selfish reason and not because they had any concerns or respect for tradition. And if they leave the NCAA, it will be for a selfish reason without any concerns whatsoever for the traditions that will be blown up because of it.

[Xville]

Will Dan be coaching the lakers? Who knows what he will do, but if it were my choice, It’d be a no brainer to get out of the college ranks

[Xavier]

He’s mentioned wanting to coach in the NBA before. It’s better for the conference if he stays obviously. But if he goes maybe X/Creighton are the future of Big East.

[xubrew]

The motto all throughout D1 college sports is not "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." It's "Claim superiority and then just don't play them and refuse to associate with them on the grounds that you're just too awesome and have nothing to gain."

The power programs leaving would be very much on brand.

[xubrew]

2029 would also be the 25th year anniversary of "The Run."

My prediction is that they will do something special to recognize that team, and Thad Matta will either not be invited, or if he is invited and shows up he'll get booed. 25 years later. Maybe at the 50th people will be somewhat over it, but I doubt it.

[MHettel]

I've slowly come to realize that what I liked the most about college sports, and college basketball in particular, doesn't matter to most people. It's not what's valued by those who are in positions of power.

Traditional rivalries don't matter. Tons of them have ended in the last decade or so.

Regional rivalries and opponents don't matter either. A lot of teams that could create a great deal of interest from playing each other simply don't play.

Tradition doesn't matter.

All conferences having a path to NCAA Championships doesn't matter.

Working to create compelling regular season showcases and match-ups doesn't matter. In fact if a team from outside a major conference is particularly good, they can't even get anyone to play them. There were years where teams like SFA, and just this past year McNeese State, couldn't even fill out their schedules even though they basically offered to go on the road and play a P5 team for no money.

And I'm now starting to think that college basketball in and of itself doesn't matter. It's an afterthought. It's an Olympic sport that makes money, which is nice, but it's not football. It's not important enough to the SEC, Big Ten, and other Power programs to stick around and remain in the NCAA for. The "Select 60" as someone called it can just play amongst themselves and completely detach from the other non-select 300.

People say they love college athletics because it's all about the love of the game. In reality, it's LESS about the game than any other major sports organization on Earth. If it really were about the game, then rivalries like Oklahoma v Oklahoma State wouldn't be ending. And neither would about a hundred other rivalries that have ended or will end.

The problem is that the decision makers ONLY see the money involved with college sports. Thats the OUTCOME. What they dont realize is that things like rivalries and traditions and having a favorite player at a school for 4 years is what attracts the FANS to the games. Without those things, there are less fans. And less fans results in less money. And the decision makers are too stupid to connect the dots. They dont realize that the money is the RESULT of having a successfull product. You can just change the product and expect the same result.

[xubrew]

The problem is that the decision makers ONLY see the money involved with college sports. Thats the OUTCOME. What they dont realize is that things like rivalries and traditions and having a favorite player at a school for 4 years is what attracts the FANS to the games. Without those things, there are less fans. And less fans results in less money. And the decision makers are too stupid to connect the dots. They dont realize that the money is the RESULT of having a successfull product. You can just change the product and expect the same result.

Spot on!!!!

[Xville]

The problem is that the decision makers ONLY see the money involved with college sports. Thats the OUTCOME. What they dont realize is that things like rivalries and traditions and having a favorite player at a school for 4 years is what attracts the FANS to the games. Without those things, there are less fans. And less fans results in less money. And the decision makers are too stupid to connect the dots. They dont realize that the money is the RESULT of having a successfull product. You can just change the product and expect the same result.

So, if we are talking football, does it matter if there are less fans that go to the games? And if it does matter, how much does it really? Hardcore fans will always go but talking about the ones that go to maybe 1-3 games a year. Attendance has been down in general across the board in college football for quite some time now, but yet tv contracts/revenues keep going up.

Yep im going to complain on here about rivalries being gone, non-con football schedules mainly sucking etc etc, but at the end of the day I'm still going to watch my teams because its so ingrained me to root for my teams for whatever reason, and that's what execs are banking on.

Could be wrong but I really don't think there are less fans or that there will be less fans with the changes going on....

Look at X for instance...all the changes that have occurred the last 4 years or so...still selling out their season tickets, still getting great tv ratings.

[MHettel]

So, if we are talking football, does it matter if there are less fans that go to the games? And if it does matter, how much does it really? Hardcore fans will always go but talking about the ones that go to maybe 1-3 games a year. Attendance has been down in general across the board in college football for quite some time now, but yet tv contracts/revenues keep going up.

Yep im going to complain on here about rivalries being gone, non-con football schedules mainly sucking etc etc, but at the end of the day I'm still going to watch my teams because its so ingrained me to root for my teams for whatever reason, and that's what execs are banking on.

Could be wrong but I really don't think there are less fans or that there will be less fans with the changes going on....

Look at X for instance...all the changes that have occurred the last 4 years or so...still selling out their season tickets, still getting great tv ratings.

Ok.

You are a fan because all the things I described have existed to MAKE YOU A FAN, and now you are "addicted" to the product and will continue to consume the product. Got it.

But when those things DONT exist, how will we get the next wave of fans "addicted" to the product?

Lets take "our" own experience at XU. I lived across the hall from Mike Hawkins and Larry Sykes as a Freshman. I had Classes with Aaron Williams & Duane Wilson. I'd see DeWaun Rose at every party. I knew the walkons. I'd go to games and watch guys I KNEW. And when I graduated, I always knew that every subsequent XU student would feel that same connection with each team every year. Until now. A kid comes in for one year, hangs out only with other players, takes a minimum courseload, and is 100% focused on being a basketball player and NOT being a student athlete. Hes a rental. He wears that Jersey for one year and XU has no permanent lasting meaning to him. Thats not the same.

Do people still go to games? Of course.

The word "Fan" is short for "Fanatic." Its Fanatics that create a homecourt advantage. Its Fanatics that make the game exiting on TV (Covid games, anyone?).

But there are also always people that just "go to games". They arent fanatics, it's just something to do.

When you stop creating fanatics, you will slowly erode the monetary value of the product.

The idea that you think every consequence is going to be IMMEDIATELY observable is annoying, and frankly lacks any type of critical reasoning. Fan interest can dwindle over a long period of time. The sport must continuously create the next wave of addicts.

[Xville]

Ok.

You are a fan because all the things I described have existed to MAKE YOU A FAN, and now you are "addicted" to the product and will continue to consume the product. Got it.

But when those things DONT exist, how will we get the next wave of fans "addicted" to the product?

Lets take "our" own experience at XU. I lived across the hall from Mike Hawkins and Larry Sykes as a Freshman. I had Classes with Aaron Williams & Duane Wilson. I'd see DeWaun Rose at every party. I knew the walkons. I'd go to games and watch guys I KNEW. And when I graduated, I always knew that every subsequent XU student would feel that same connection with each team every year. Until now. A kid comes in for one year, hangs out only with other players, takes a minimum courseload, and is 100% focused on being a basketball player and NOT being a student athlete. Hes a rental. He wears that Jersey for one year and XU has no permanent lasting meaning to him. Thats not the same.

Do people still go to games? Of course.

The word "Fan" is short for "Fanatic." Its Fanatics that create a homecourt advantage. Its Fanatics that make the game exiting on TV (Covid games, anyone?).

But there are also always people that just "go to games". They arent fanatics, it's just something to do.

When you stop creating fanatics, you will slowly erode the monetary value of the product.

The idea that you think every consequence is going to be IMMEDIATELY observable is annoying, and frankly lacks any type of critical reasoning. Fan interest can dwindle over a long period of time. The sport must continuously create the next wave of addicts.

Rivalries and all those things that you pointed out are not why I'm "addicted" to the sport of college football and basketball. It's a bit of nostalgia for me whether it be because of my time at X with friends or because of time spent with my parents/family at football games why the sport even matters. Could be wrong, but I think that's the case for a lot of people.

Take my soon to be eight year old twins. I have taken them to a lot of Louisville football games and Xavier basketball games. They love going to those games ,and most likely are going to be huge fans of one if not both of those teams as they grow up just like they are now. You think they care that Q is now gone, or are they super excited about going to a Xavier game this fall with their Dad and will cheer on the next batch of players?

I get it, you have your own story, and I'm sure that is a lot of people's stories when it comes to knowing the players etc, but yet tv revenues still going up, season tickets still selling out in X's case, and here you are still posting on most days about Xavier basketball and we are in year whatever you want to call it since a lot of things have changed. There's nothing "Immediately" about it.

The highlighted piece gets a big eye roll for me. Every number out there says that college football is only growing despite your feelings on the subject. Everything Xavier from season ticket numbers, tv numbers etc are either flat or have gone up despite your feelings
.
You say we need to create the next set of fans. The next fans, like my kids, are going to be used to these new sets of rules or changes, they aren't going to "remember the good ole days" or care. They are going to go to the games because of nostalgia, love for the actual sport because they play/played it themselves at some point, and/or because of the name on the front of the jersey for a multitude of reasons.

[xubrew]

A basketball tournament that features 32 teams, all from four power conferences, would not be as popular as the NCAA Tournament that we currently have.

A second basketball tournament of 64/68 teams from from the 27 (I think) remaining conferences that aren't power conferences wouldn't be as popular as the NCAA Tournament we currently have, and would likely be even less popular than the 32 team power conference tournament.

Not as many fans would be interested. Less fans will eventually mean less money. Even if the Power schools feel they'll get more money initially, they'll be sacrificing a lot of popularity. I that was MHettel's point, and I agree with him. I also think his point was that the decision makers do not understand this or think of it this way, and I also agree with that. They don't.

I think a lot of rivalries being discontinued have also hurt the sport, and I think the overall attitude of avoiding games that would be compelling because so many schools are convinced they have nothing to gain by playing them have hindered its ability to grow in popularity.

Texas and Texas A&M were both puzzled. They wanted more fans for their OOC basketball games, and neither could figure out a way to make that happen. GEEZ!! IF ONLY THERE HAD BEEN AN OBVIOUS SOLUTION!!!

Same with Utah. They can't figure out why their OOC attendance has dipped. GEEZ!! I WONDER WHY!!!

And there are about a hundred other examples of that, but you get the point. "We have nothing to gain!" That's how they think. They're just too awesome and don't need to remain affiliated with the other 300+ schools that aren't power/elite programs like they themselves are. It's a shortsighted way of looking at things, but that is how they look at things.

[Xville]

A basketball tournament that features 32 teams, all from four power conferences, would not be as popular as the NCAA Tournament that we currently have.

A second basketball tournament of 64/68 teams from from the 27 (I think) remaining conferences that aren't power conferences wouldn't be as popular as the NCAA Tournament we currently have, and would likely be even less popular than the 32 team power conference tournament.

Not as many fans would be interested. Less fans will eventually mean less money. Even if the Power schools feel they'll get more money initially, they'll be sacrificing a lot of popularity. I that was MHettel's point, and I agree with him. I also think his point was that the decision makers do not understand this or think of it this way, and I also agree with that. They don't.

I think a lot of rivalries being discontinued have also hurt the sport, and I think the overall attitude of avoiding games that would be compelling because so many schools are convinced they have nothing to gain by playing them have hindered its ability to grow in popularity.

Texas and Texas A&M were both puzzled. They wanted more fans for their OOC basketball games, and neither could figure out a way to make that happen. GEEZ!! IF ONLY THERE HAD BEEN AN OBVIOUS SOLUTION!!!

Same with Utah. They can't figure out why their OOC attendance has dipped. GEEZ!! I WONDER WHY!!!

And there are about a hundred other examples of that, but you get the point.

Regarding the NCAA basketball tournament, sure I agree there. If they change the one thing that makes the sport as "popular" as it is, and turn it into what you are describing, the sport will ultimately have less fans.

[MHettel]

I'll provide another kind of "erosion" related thing thats out there that seems like a good idea at first, but then when you look at the subtle consequences you have to second guess the decision.

Baseball moving to a scheduling format where you play EVERY team every year. Seem brilliant, yeah? New Players coming in, new teams coming in. Should be great.

Except in order to do that, they had to cut some inter-division games (teams played a considerable portion of their schedule against their division previously). And where i live in Seattle, that means a bunch of games that would NORMALLY start at 7PM when everyone can watch them, are now starting as early as 4PM. I used to look forward to getting home from, work and having the ballgame be my evening entertainment. Now alot of times the games are over by the time people get home from work. They have literally created an OPENING in peoples evening schedule where they would have been consuming the product. how shortsighted.

Lets take that a little further. Seeing the Pac 12 essentially blow up will mean there is a smaller inventory of football games being played in the Pacific timezone. Nearly all of the PAC 12 used to be played in that time zone. Now most road games for those West Coast schools will be starting 2 or 3 hours earlier. This will create a void of options for those late Saturday football games. Some people bet ALL DAY on college football. I believe the Mountain West can capitalize on this. they should be able to improve their TV exposure and betting action, which will drive a little more interest in the conference.

[JTG]

Hett,
The bulk of the population is east of the Mississippi, and hates games that start at 10 pm. Or Sat football @ 3:30pm. Notre Dame football tickets used to be very hard to get. You had to be an Alum or know someone. Since they now start their games at 3:30, they start begging people in May to buy tickets. When their games started at 1 many of their fans did day trips from Chicago, indy, Detroit, Cincinnati Columbus Louisville St Louis. Now, the game ends @ 7:30, you get back on the road around 8:30 and if you stop for dinner, it past midnight even if you're just going to Indy or Chicago.

[UCGRAD4X]

2:30 or better from Cincy. Thankfully only one 7:30 start in Sount Bend. Staying an extra night at $250 - $300 is fun.

Nobody at the stadium likes those games. Players, coaches, press hate it, opposing teams especially hate it. I imagine even locals find it hard to go out afterwards to any of the good sport friendly spots due to crowds / long wait times.

Good for TV $$$.

[JTG]

Welcome to our absurd legal system. The 1983 NC State team has filed suit against the NCAA for NIL reparations. Unless judges start saying "No f*king way" college sports will end.

[xudash]

Welcome to our absurd legal system. The 1983 NC State team has filed suit against the NCAA for NIL reparations. Unless judges start saying "No f*king way" college sports will end.

Where is the consideration in all of this!

They were not party to generating income at the levels we see now to warrant such reparations. What Stupidity!

[xubrew]

Welcome to our absurd legal system. The 1983 NC State team has filed suit against the NCAA for NIL reparations. Unless judges start saying "No f*king way" college sports will end.

Their case is that their NILs have been used by the NCAA for marketing purposes for the past 40 years and they have not been compensated for it. And, speaking strictly from a legal standpoint, they absolutely have a case. I think their case is as strong as O'Bannon's was. Maybe even stronger.

This is what I meant when I said the House Case does not bring any closure or any protection against future litigation. If anything, all former athletes who were not a part of it are looking at it and thinking "Well, what about MY money?"

[xubrew]

Where is the consideration in all of this!

They were not party to generating income at the levels we see now to warrant such reparations. What Stupidity!

I'll actually be surprised if they don't get a settlement.

And I'll be infinitely more surprised if there aren't dozens of other lawsuits of a similar nature.

[JTG]

I'll actually be surprised if they don't get a settlement.

And I'll be infinitely more surprised if there aren't dozens of other lawsuits of a similar nature.

What's next? HS players demanding pay for TV stations showing game highlights on Fri night? Do pro athletes get paid for every highlight ever shown? Game replays? That's what this foolishness amounts to. Don't work for your money, just sue, and get free money.

[MHettel]

I'll actually be surprised if they don't get a settlement.

And I'll be infinitely more surprised if there aren't dozens of other lawsuits of a similar nature.

I can only imagine how many "doors have been opened" for these guys that were part of that team in 1983. How many "perks" have they had over the years? How many paid speaking engagements have they done. How many dinners comped? How many free trips and rounds of golf?

i can point to an actual case of where I worked and the CEO hired a former wide receiver from one of the state schools. completely unqualified with ZERO experience in our industry. He got the office next to the CEO and 250K+ per year. CEO would bring this guy around....just to impress people. Thats it. That was his job. i would say he's been fairly compensated....

[xubrew]

I’m not necessarily saying that the laws are entirely practical. I am saying that that the NCAA needs to recognize what the laws are. Choosing to complain about how silly they think they are isn’t going to do them any good. They need to act in a way that actually improves their standing and protects them from future litigation. Doing what the SCOTUS told them they needed to do over a year ago would be a good start.

[xubrew]

So at the Summer Meetings…

https://www.aol.com/sports/future-college-sports-uncertain-one-121652533.html

[UCGRAD4X]

So at the Summer Meetings…

https://www.aol.com/sports/future-college-sports-uncertain-one-121652533.html

How is the Big East being represented in these discussions? They talk a lot about the NCAA tournament expansion, fueled by the P4 wanting more representation. They mention in passing the "nearly 100 basketball only schools" and then the expctation for the big 4 leagues to hold decision making authority over governance, access and revenue.

[xubrew]

How is the Big East being represented in these discussions? They talk a lot about the NCAA tournament expansion, fueled by the P4 wanting more representation. They mention in passing the "nearly 100 basketball only schools" and then the expctation for the big 4 leagues to hold decision making authority over governance, access and revenue.

It’s pretty obvious that the Big East is not being represented. The P5/P4 has never included the Big East. They have autonomy. The BE does not. When they meet amongst themselves like they did this weekend, the BE isn’t there. I don’t necessarily think that they’ll leave the NCAA, but if they do the BE almost assuredly won’t be included. Why would it be when it’s not included now and never really has been?

[Final4]

So at the Summer Meetings…

https://www.aol.com/sports/future-college-sports-uncertain-one-121652533.html

Well congratulations to all parties involved. Your greed and ignorance has now successfully fucked up one of the great institutions of my lifetime........college athletics.