Quantcast
Sports

Will power conferences break away?

Comments

Return To Article
  • poyman Lincoln City, OR
    July 25, 2013 10:57 p.m.

    Don't see any separation happening... It has "anti-trust" written all over it... In fact, I think before long (even with the way things are running today)that Congress will step in and possibly even mandate conference alignment that would give all schools an equal shot at a national Championship...

  • ExecutorIoh West Jordan, UT
    July 25, 2013 3:36 p.m.

    I have no problem with a $2000 stipend if the schools can afford it. Many comments sounds like you are paying the players, what this really is, is money for room, board and other living expenses which is currently not covered in the athletic scholarships. Many academic scholarships, including the one I went to school on, include some living allowances. I understand that some smaller schools can't afford it for all their student athletes, in fact some larger schools can't either, but why not make it optional? Then schools can chose if they want to do stipends. As long as they follow Title IX and not screw women's sports in favor of the powerful football dollar, I say go for it if you want to.

    In the Utah / BYU banter here, I think both schools can afford the stipend, USU might only be able to afford a partial stipend, if at all.

  • Wiscougarfan River Falls, WI
    July 25, 2013 1:26 p.m.

    If there is ever a new division created for the college football elite I like BYU's chances in getting an invite (Utah should also be in). I would think the criteria would include factors like football success (i.e. Sagarin ranking), marketability (i.e. t.v. markets and fan loyalty), and profitability.

    Since 2006, BYU’s lowest Sagarin ranking was #45 (2010), and they’ve averaged a #26 ranking with three top 20 finishes and a 6-1 bowl record. The University of Utah has also done well, averaging a Sagarin ranking of #34 over that span and winning all six of their bowl games.

    According to a study published in the N.Y. Times, BYU has the 43rd largest fanbase in college football (710k), while Utah has the 67th largest (351k). SLC is the 33rd largest television market (917k viewers) ahead of cities like Cincy, San Antonio, and Las Vegas.

    BYU's football team has operating expenses of $15m and total revenue of #22.4m for a surplus of $7.4m. Utah spends $14.8m, makes $20.8m, for a surplus of $6m.

    Looking at this criteria both BYU and Utah would be shoe-ins.

  • midpacmajor Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 25, 2013 1:06 p.m.

    Wiscougarfan

    Sunday play would also be a non-issue. There's no way college football would want to lock horns with the NFL in a playoff situation and there's absolutely no reason why BYU would ever need to play a regular season game on Sunday.

    ------------

    Silent Lurker

    "Over the past few years BYU has lost to most of the better teams on their schedule. Even your designated bottom feeder Utah has owned you."

    BYU's lifetime winning percentage versus Top 25 - 21%
    Utah's lifetime winning percentage versus Top 25 - 16%

    Wins versus Top 25 since 2008:

    BYU: #16/#17 Utah State, #18/#18 Utah
    Utah: ur/#25 BYU

    Winning 2 of 3 games on fluke plays doesn't prove anything.

    And lets not forget, Kyle has proven he can lose to ANYBODY (see 10-loss UNLV and Colorado).

    The reason Utah has so few 10+ win seasons in their history isn't SOS, the sad truth is, U just haven't been very good, as proven by your paltry 5 AP Top 25 finishes in your entire history.

    You need come out from under that crimson bubble on the hill once in awhile in order to see reality.

  • jej SANDY, UT
    July 25, 2013 12:56 p.m.

    Wouldn't that be absolutely hilarious? If it comes down to who can afford to play at this point in time BYU is in and Utah is out. BYU can afford to foot the bill to play with the big boys. They get all the money that comes from tv contracts, endorsements, stadium revenue etc. They don't have to split it in any percent with the other 8-11 teams in a conference.

  • STuFOO Korea, AE
    July 25, 2013 12:39 p.m.

    Silent lurker

    "Take off your blue goggles and wake up."

    To what? An imaginary scenario where this is actually going to happen?

    "Do you think the LDS Church will pick up the extra tab? (stipends)"

    I was unaware that the LDS church is paying for football at all. BYU is self sufficient in sports, just like many other church entities like Deseret Industries and church welfare farms. If football can pay for it, I can't see why the LDS church would drop it. Nor do I see any evidence that this is a possibility.

    "Do you believe God would rather have a BYU football team in a upper division than have you help the under privileged people of the world?"

    The nice part about the LDS Church is that they seem to be able to do both.

    And for the most part, people can do both. One can give fast offerings and by BYU football tickets and also give money to those commercials on TV if they want.

    I believe that Wiscougarfan destroyed your the arguments.

    So yes, I have no problem believing BYU would be IN in this imaginary scenario.

  • cougar76 Raleigh, NC
    July 25, 2013 12:28 p.m.

    I have a solution. Let them form their own conference, but don's call it Division 4. Call it minor league football. They will object to calling it minor, but they have become nothing more than a minor league training ground for the NFL. In fact, let the NFL oversee the whole mess. They can even pay their players more than they are already being paid. All of the schools unlucky(?) enough to not be included would reorganize under the NCAA and their players could once again legitimately be called student athletes

  • Y Grad / Y Dad Richland, WA
    July 25, 2013 12:12 p.m.

    Silent Lurker
    Cottonwood Heights, UT

    "Do you believe God would rather have a BYU football team in a upper division than have you help the under privileged people of the world?"

    Well, yes. Seems to me the the church is already doing a rather decent job of both.

    A lot of y'all just aren't listening (reading) very well.

    This is all about the M O N E Y. The Haves want to parlay what they have into More. They don't want the Have Nots to have Less, they just want the Have Nots to have less access to More.

    The fine point is, they propose that you have to Pay to Play. Infante is suggesting that within the power conferences, while the Rich currently subsidize the Poor, under a new system, they won't want to.

    The irony is delicious. The mere suggestion that this change could result in Utah = out and BYU = in has Utah fans in total denial.

    I'm not saying it's right, or that it's inevitable, just that it's funny.

  • Wiscougarfan River Falls, WI
    July 25, 2013 11:24 a.m.

    RE: Silent Lurker

    "I am amazed at the BYU fans that think they will be included in a new division. Have you forgotten about the Sunday play issue? The academic issues? Graduate programs? Research programs? Do you really believe you will be accommodated on all of these?"

    Sunday play may indeed be an issue. Graduate programs and research shouldn't, as this is a football initiative, not a conference affiliation. If a "high research" classification (like BYU has) was an issue than Baylor, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State would also be on the outside looking in. If graduate programs was a top priority, than Auburn, Boston College, Texas Tech, and Arkansas can all forget about an invite.

  • Silent Lurker Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 25, 2013 10:59 a.m.

    I am amazed at the BYU fans that think they will be included in a new division. Have you forgotten about the Sunday play issue? The academic issues? Graduate programs? Research programs? Do you really believe you will be accommodated on all of these? Do you think the LDS Church will pick up the extra tab? (stipends) Do you believe God would rather have a BYU football team in a upper division than have you help the under privileged people of the world?

    It is much easier to win ten games when you are playing six or seven gimme games. BYU has never played more than four BCS level teams in one year. Or do you think your team could compete with a ten game schedule like most of the Power 5? Do you really think you would get away with playing a schedule like the past two years and the 2015 year? Even this years schedule is not up to BCS standards! Over the past few years BYU has lost to most of the better teams on their schedule. Even your designated bottom feeder Utah has owned you. Take off your blue goggles and wake up.

  • VAggie Bristow, United States
    July 25, 2013 9:47 a.m.

    It is a zero sum game, because there are not an unlimited amount of Division 1 players. This will hurt a lot of middle and lower tier schools in the PAC, SEC, BIG, BIG 12, and even hurt upper tier schools in the ACC. Only a handful of schools should want this, and a smaller handful of schools return any money from football, because the costs of football are also a lot higher. If players need to be paid so badly, they should allow kids to go pro earlier. If not those handful of maybe 12 schools (probably less) can leave the NCAA and only play each other.

  • jej SANDY, UT
    July 25, 2013 9:42 a.m.

    What this will eventually come down to is money. Money is what is driving college sports today. Which teams have the best market and which teams bring in the most revenue. BYU will not be left out if this change ever happens because they bring money and a nationwide audience. That is why ESPN partnered with BYU in a broadcast deal. They understand it is a good market and a money maker. The worldwide leader in sports is not stupid. If the ability to pay athletes additional scholarship money to cover full cost of attendance is going to be the measuring stick for this new "power conference" then BYU most certainly will not be on the outside. They can afford it. Other teams in these power conferences would struggle to do that.

  • Barnbug1 SPANISH FORK, UT
    July 24, 2013 9:36 p.m.

    Most of you on this board seem to get all of their info from, well, message boards. The reason the big boys are looking to re-organize is they want to get away from conference members who suck more out of the system than they could contribute. Athletic programs who would lose money were it not for TV deals will be in trouble unless they are winning regularly. This will be about money,period. Those who think current membership guarantees anything are wrong. That is what I was told, take it or leave it.

  • Marked it Down Park City, UT
    July 24, 2013 9:20 p.m.

    Since all of the big boys want 7 home games, IF this ever happens, schools like Utah will end up playing all of their OOC games on the road - 5 home and 7 road, or 4 home and 8 road, will become the norm for Utah.

  • Striker Omaha, NE
    July 24, 2013 7:51 p.m.

    This will never happen, but if it did, I can't wait to see these schools fall on their faces. Really shallow schools like Florida and Ohio State pad their schedules with cupcakes because their conference is too hard for the poor babies. Get rid of those cupcakes and they will struggle. I would LOVE to see this happen.

  • Mark321 Las Vegas, NV
    July 24, 2013 3:51 p.m.

    @ Chris B

    "If byu had multiple undefeated seasons the past 10 years, multiple BCS bowls, multiple BCS wins, a bowl win over Alabama, multiple top 5 finishes in the past 10 years....you'd have an invite too."

    What a silly standard to measure an invite. More than half of the teams currently in the BCS conferences wouldn't make the cut with those standards. More than half of the BCS teams never made it to a BCS bowl game let alone multiple ones. Do you think Indiana, Duke, Iowa State, Northwestern, Syracuse should remain in the BCS when they don't even meet those standards? BYU is better than half of the teams currently in the BCS. Again, Chris your not being objective. You emotional disdain for BYU is overcoming your common sense. Do you really believe Duke, Indiana, Iowa State, Northwestern, Purdue, or Washington State is better than BYU in football? If you believe that than you really are delusional.

  • STuFOO Korea, AE
    July 24, 2013 3:30 p.m.

    ekute

    "BYU could run the tables this year, have a magical season and" nobody would care. "College football is just that way" since 2 years ago. lol.

    Again, thanks for proving my point.

    Meaning you would try not to care, and you'd be back on BYU boards for some other reason.

    It is funny that utah "fans" claim that Independence makes BYU obsolete. Despite overwhelming evidence of the contrary.

    No, I am not going to write it all again. There are hundreds of examples provided by BYU fans on every article for the past year.

    It boils down to a simple principle.

    Do you frame your teams success ONLY as it relates to your rival, or do you see past your rival and see success for success sake?

    Which one are you?

    I don't care about the u. I don't read their articles. I don't follow the team, at all. But don't mistake that with defending one of my teams from people who can only frame their teams success in relation to BYU.

  • Y Grad / Y Dad Richland, WA
    July 24, 2013 3:13 p.m.

    MyPerspective
    Salt Lake City, UT
    Y Grad / Y Dad

    Your time would be better spent worrying about how byu would fit into the proposed "new order" rather than fretting over your so called "have-nots in the 5P." Washington St., Colorado, and Utah will be just fine as will Illinois, Vanderbilt, and Iowa St. The "haves" will continue to "have."

    Lets see, John Infante, an NCAA expert, posits the theory, the AP thinks its credible enough to report it, but MyPerspective says no way. Hmmmm, who to believe, who to believe?

    BYU brings $50 million to the table while Oregon, Stanford and USC subsidize my beloved Wazzu, Colorado and Utah, and you're not going to even think about it?

  • Snack PAC Olympus Cove, Utah
    July 24, 2013 3:02 p.m.

    ekute

    Utah will never run the table again, never win a conference championship, and never play in the playoffs. The Utes have been, and always will be, PAC bottom dwellers - that's just the way it is for the Utes, in every sport. LOL!

  • Y Grad / Y Dad Richland, WA
    July 24, 2013 2:44 p.m.

    Who am I sir?
    Cottonwood Heights, UT
    @ YGrad/YDad

    "And yet you keep devouring these nonsense stories..."

    If the definition of "devouring" is to see the headline and possibly read the comments then I am guilty."

    In other words, another well informed Ute poster. "I read the headline, judged the entire article as an utter waste of time, and took the time to tell everyone else my opinion, based on their opinion."

  • ekute Layton, UT
    July 24, 2013 2:26 p.m.

    "BYU could run the tables this year, have a magical season and" nobody would care. "College football is just that way" since 2 years ago. lol.

  • AggieVoice Logan, UT
    July 24, 2013 1:41 p.m.

    Isn't money in sports derived from viewership? I don't understand why the big conferences would want to drop thier viewership...? While their fans comprise a majority of college football fans in the country, there are still PLENTY of fans that are mainly interested in their school. If Utah State was in a lower division, I wouldn't care as much about watching the higher league because they have nothing to do with my school. If I want to see the best athletes, I can watch the NFL. Sounds like a bad idea, and I doubt anything will ever come of it.

  • SportsFan Orem, UT
    July 24, 2013 1:37 p.m.

    Chris B

    Utah didn't "earn" anything; the Utes were simply in the right place at the right time.

    It's obvious to any intelligent fan that Colorado's years of mediocrity and Utah's momentary flash in the pan success didn't have any influence whatsoever on the PAC's decision to invite Colorado and Utah to join their conference.

    All that the PAC really needed was a couple of warm bodies with decent-sized television markets and the proper "cultural fit" to fill out the roster so the PAC could play a conference championship game and increase their television market.

    The Utes have already proven beyond any doubt that as far as athletics and football are concerned, the Utes are in over their heads - not a single win over a conference foe with a winning record and bottom dwelling finishes in every PAC sport except for the Red Rocks.

  • STuFOO Korea, AE
    July 24, 2013 1:23 p.m.

    Chris b

    "Know how we "overcame" the bcs issues we didn't like?"

    OK so the local mob is shaking down businesses in a certain part of town. A politician finds out about the corruption and starts to make waves. He visits with his fellow politicians and decides that it needs to be changed.

    the local mob can't get simply rid of the problem overtly. So instead, they bring in the politician and make him a deal that if he shuts up ad plays along, even help them to become respectable, they will cut him in for a partial share.

    The politician, eager to be accepted by the "big boy's" eagerly accepts it and then justifies their position by singing the virtues of the mob's respectable side while ignoring the criminal side.

    Earned it like that?

    Look, I don't care if utah is in the pac 12. But don't come here to tell me that utah is somehow superior because they are.

    That's an argument waiting for a train that does not exist.

  • STuFOO Korea, AE
    July 24, 2013 1:12 p.m.

    Chris b

    "We EARNED an invite."

    I have no problem with the idea that utah earned an invite. They earned it to shut them up and not make waves for the BCS. It takes nothing away from what BYU had done or is doing.

    However,that is not what your posts is really about is it?

    You post only in RELATION to BYU and frame your success only in how you can chase your on bias against BYU. It is NOT about utahs success, it is about your perceived BYU failure.

    For example: "But your team isn't capable of doing those things."

    Interesting that 10 years ago, no one thought utah could do it either, then did. So in your bias opinion BYU can't, not ever...

    once again proves my point.

    BYU could run the tables this year, have a magical season and cause all kinds of problems for the BCS. College football is just that way.

    But, in your eyes it can't happen. Which proves my point again.

    utah was invited, so what? in college football you are only as relevant as your last season.

    Except for National Championships. They are forever.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    July 24, 2013 12:40 p.m.

    @StuFoo,

    Know how we "overcame" the bcs issues we didn't like?

    We EARNED an invite.

    If byu had multiple undefeated seasons the past 10 years, multiple BCS bowls, multiple BCS wins, a bowl win over Alabama, multiple top 5 finishes in the past 10 years....you'd have an invite too.

    But your team isn't capable of doing those things.

    So you're still OUT!

  • STuFOO Korea, AE
    July 24, 2013 11:39 a.m.

    MyPerspective

    My apologies...

    Instead of ute trolls I meant ute "fans" whose only purpose is to come to any article that is remotely about BYU who feel that they need to explain to BYU fans why they are irrelevant and not part of a "big boy" conference,regardless of what ther article is actually about.

    Feel better?

    I don't think it is a conspiracy theory at all. There are hundreds of examples where corrupt organizations bribing people with justifiable power to shut up and not be a problem anymore.

    If your argument is that the BCS is not corrupt...

    I can't help you there. They are indefensible.

    What cracks me up is that when utah was on the outside in 2008 and scorned by the system, they were some of the most outspoken (justifiably so) people against the BCS...

    Five years later, the fall all over themselves gushing about being accepted and part of the program they once hated and felt was keeping them from what they earned.

    It is not a hard jump to see that it worked.

  • VegasUte Las Vegas, NV
    July 24, 2013 11:25 a.m.

    Sorry - that was Riverton Cougar that said that, not Wiscougarfan.

  • Cougar Claws Lindon, UT
    July 24, 2013 11:21 a.m.

    I don't know why they don't just let players use their likenesses to market their individual talents. If the players are marketable, why not let them market themselves. Isn't that what capitalism is all about?

  • VegasUte Las Vegas, NV
    July 24, 2013 11:15 a.m.

    @mindgames:

    "they are putting together great schedules"

    Ya, a home and home against Middle Tennessee State, that's a great schedule, if you are a byU "fan".

    @CougFaninTX:

    "If a student needs more spending money, they should get a job."

    It's not that simple. You need to read the "NCAA Rules Regarding Jobs for Student-Athletes" and let us know what it means. It is very convoluted. A lot of the NCAA rules are extremely arbitrary and convoluted. That is why the Big 5 wants out.

    For me personally, I don't like the idea of a break away. I think that would destroy college football as we know it. However, it is not unprecedented. In 1978, the NCAA split Division 1 football into 1-A and 1-AA pretty much dooming 1-AA schools into relative obscurity.

    I would have to agree with Wiscougarfan, byU would be included in the top 70. However, the PAC "bias" is a laughable excuse.

    I hope the break away doesn't happen. But at the same time, I hope the NCAA backs down quite a bit. They will need to to avoid the oncoming insanity.

    Regardless of what happens - Go Utes!! Come on 8/29!!

  • MyPerspective Salt Lake City, UT
    July 24, 2013 11:09 a.m.

    Wiscougarfan
    "Fortunately for you there are years worth of posts here in the DNews archives..."

    LOL! A great example of how long it has been since byu was relevant. DN archives haven't existed long enough to capture the talk of byu going to the Pac-10. Much of that occurred at church before computers and comment boards. However, if you want an example of byu fans thinking they belong in the Pac-12...go to the DN archives beginning June 10, 2012 and look for yourself.

    Riverton Cougar
    I have no idea where byu would end up in the proposed scenario and as far as I am concerned, it's all speculation and hardly worth the time spent reading and commenting on it. However, it would be wise to take note that up to this point, byu has, indeed, been left out.

    STuFOO
    Ute trolls? You have a nasty penchant for calling people names. I believe this article pertains to college football and you certainly do not own it. At any rate, you put forward quite a conspiracy theory. Not even D. Harmon has proffered that one.

  • ekute Layton, UT
    July 24, 2013 10:50 a.m.

    riverton cougar,

    I believe byu would get extended an opportunity to get included.
    My inclination is that byu would remain true to their "mission statement" and byu tv, and opt to stay independent...to the dismay of their fans. It would be interesting to hear holmoe and bronco's thoughts on this subject.

  • STuFOO Korea, AE
    July 24, 2013 10:09 a.m.

    Chris B and other ute trolls who think BYU would be left out.

    Did you actually read the article?

    read the last paragraph to understand why BYU would not be left out.

    think about it...

    Why was utah invited to the PAC 10?

    Because thy had a legitimate beef with a corrupt system. (a system they continually think they busted, but was created because BYU already broke it) They knew it then (even if their fans can't figure it out now) governors and attorney generals as well as senators and congressmen were getting involved. How did they solve it? utah invite to shut them up.

    This is the MO of a corrupt system.

    BYU wouldn't be the only team invited into the new system. It would depend upon the politicians who would step into the frey to pander a vote.

    So to any ute fan still wagging the dog about being in and BYU will be left out...

    think again.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    July 24, 2013 9:45 a.m.

    Do you guys seriously believe that BYU wouldn't be considered one of the 70 best college football programs? Do you guys seriously think that these super conferences (if they come to fruition) would pick a school like Colorado or Vanderbilt over BYU? Even if Colorado has better academics than BYU, this is pure football we're talking about for these super conferences. There is no way BYU wouldn't be included in the top 70 schools in the nation, unless there was a non-sports related bias (see PAC).

  • Wiscougarfan River Falls, WI
    July 24, 2013 9:18 a.m.

    RE: MyPerspective

    "As for byu, 30 years of talking like their invitation to the Pac-10 was immanent went down the tubes on June 10, 2010."

    I would like to see any evidence of BYU fans EVER saying anything remotely close to that. Fortunately for you there are years worth of posts here in the DNews archives, so this should be a simple task. Thanks in advance.

  • Who am I sir? Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 24, 2013 9:14 a.m.

    @ YGrad/YDad

    "And yet you keep devouring these nonsense stories..."

    If the definition of "devouring" is to see the headline and possibly read the comments then I am guilty. I have never read or opened one of these "articles". I shake my head in disbelief, laugh at what I perceive the purpose of the article is, then possibly read the comments to see what reaction any other sports fan might have.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    July 24, 2013 9:01 a.m.

    Regardless of future changes to the college landscape, two things will be constant:

    1. Utah will be IN
    2. byu and usu will be OUT!

    I LOVE my Pac 12 membership!

    Pretty soon byu and usu will by Division II programs!

    LOL

  • Max-was-right springville, UT
    July 24, 2013 8:54 a.m.

    The Utes paying their players to sit home and watch BYU play in bowl games each year sounds about right.

  • MyPerspective Salt Lake City, UT
    July 24, 2013 8:34 a.m.

    Y Grad / Y Dad
    Your time would be better spent worrying about how byu would fit into the proposed "new order" rather than fretting over your so called "have-nots in the 5P." Washington St., Colorado, and Utah will be just fine as will Illinois, Vanderbilt, and Iowa St. The "haves" will continue to "have."

    As for byu, 30 years of talking like their invitation to the Pac-10 was immanent went down the tubes on June 10, 2010. A valuable experience that can be / should be applied going forward. byu should know by now that there are no entitlements...their place with the elite has to be earned.

  • MyPerspective Salt Lake City, UT
    July 24, 2013 8:16 a.m.

    mindgames
    Dnquixote

    You are two byu fans looking at this from opposite ends of the spectrum. I wonder which of you has it right? If this proposal comes to fruition in it's entirety or some hybrid form, I tend to believe that the haves will continue to have and that the have nots will continue likewise. The Power Conference will continue to be just that.

    There is a story on the SL Trib site that explores the split. Check it out. Mindgames will be greatly disappointed if a super conference is indeed formed. Like the rest of his post, his assertion that "...as an independent they are putting together great schedules..." either lacks insight and common sense or he hasn't yet seen the 2014 schedule Holmoe has in store for byu fans.

  • Y Grad / Y Dad Richland, WA
    July 24, 2013 7:58 a.m.

    Who am I sir?
    Cottonwood Heights, UT

    And yet you keep devouring these nonsense stories...

    -----------------

    So if this really boils down to "pay to play", does anyone doubt that BYU would ante up? And if the discussion turns to the new have-nots in the 5P, where might that leave Washington State, Colorado... and Utah?

  • Dnquixote Las Vegas, NV
    July 24, 2013 12:43 a.m.

    BYU haters will be quick to jump on board in support of this, as it could potentially, in effect, ruin BYU football. But this could end up in a loosely regulated free-for-all, reminiscent of Wall-Street, circa 2005. Be careful what you wish for!!!

  • mindgames Aurora, CO
    July 24, 2013 12:19 a.m.

    This split would be good news for BYU as they have positioned themselves outside the "little 5" conferences. As an independent they are putting together great schedules and will be the second independent to be part of the super conference. Big worry for any of the bottom feeders of the major conferences. Their performances will be evaluated as unappealing and unworthy to step into the new "Super 70" division.

    Oh, and imagine the great playoff system that they will put together for this division...sixteen of the best (and it won't matter if 10 are from the old SEC it will just be the best). Can't wait for BYU's schedule to have Auburn, Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State, Florida, Wisconsin, Oregon, Notre Dame, Arizona State and South Carolina. Ten regular season games and then the 16-team playoffs. Spectacular.

    Then the next year 10 more "Super 70" teams. Wow.

    So much like the NFL where every week is a challenging game and a 7-3 record will be recognized as a great achievement.

    Let's get this thing done and make the next big move in college football.

  • CougFaninTX Frisco, TX
    July 23, 2013 11:05 p.m.

    This makes no sense to me. Many athletic programs, even in the Power 5 are not financially solvent. They are subsidized by the taxpayers so they can pay coaches multi-million dollar salaries.

    Mack Brown is the highest paid government worker in Texas, and maybe in the nation. Does he add more value than the President, or the Governor or a great teacher?

    As soon as the entire athletic department is self sufficient and no longer needs taxpayer subsidies, I'm all ears. But at that point I will argue, why is an athlete more deserving of a $2,000 subsidy than a student on an educational scholarship?

    If a student needs more spending money, they should get a job.

  • Who am I sir? Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 23, 2013 10:25 p.m.

    Love the News. Burying the story, two days later than the Trib and SI broke it, while providing greater access to the top 200? mustaches of former BYU athletes. Journalism at its finest. (By the way, when I attended the Y it was a violation to have facial hair, sandals, Bermuda shorts above the knees, long hair, etc. etc. Can't wait for the next installment of the 21-40th greatest tight ends, wide outs, running backs, long snappers, etc. D-news is to be commended for its attempt to keep the Y sports relevant at least related to the past.

  • U 90 Corona, CA
    July 23, 2013 10:03 p.m.

    This article and ESPN U are now calling the old BSC schools the "5 Power conferences".

    If the 5P separate from the other conferences and pay their players while the remaining schools don't, this will create even more separation from a recruiting perspective.

  • Steven S Jarvis Orem, UT
    July 23, 2013 8:58 p.m.

    Paying athletes when MOST schools running a football program are already losing money sounds like a sure-fire way of sinking half of he so-called D4 programs into having to be subsidized by the taxpayers or student bodies or folding most of the other sports. It is far better to let students go pro then to create a scheme like this.