Comments about ‘Commentary: 'Power 5' commissioners' strategy could mean the end of social mobility in college football’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, July 26 2013 12:34 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
WACPaddingOurSchedule
pocatello, ID

toosmartforyou
Farmington, UT
Those thinking BYU has financial problems are not aware that a few years ago it was in the news that there were TWO schools in the entire country that had football programs operating in the black and ONE of them was BYU. And since it is a private institution they don't need to tell anyone their business, do they?

_______

At last count there were 22 schools with profitable athletic departments. That excludes student fees and government funds. Did not see BYU on the list (private school). That does not mean they are not profitable, But there are more than two schools.

motorbike
Cottonwood Heights, UT

A lot of nervous and spiteful Coug fans on this article.

Y Grad / Y Dad
Richland, WA

WACPaddingOurSchedule
pocatello, ID

Go back and re-read the statement. "Two football programs" "22 athletic departments". One statement does not, necessarily, invalidate the other.

Dutchman
Murray, UT

Nothing to fear, none of your tax dollars goes to fund Utah athletics. The entire $253 million state appropriation funds grad and under grad education at a 40 percent level.

midpacmajor
Salt Lake City, Utah

motorbike

"A lot of nervous and spiteful Coug fans on this article."

No need for "Coug" fans to be nervous or spiteful. BYU isn't the program facing the prospect of perpetual losing, conference basement finishes, with no bowl games.

WACPaddingOurSchedule
pocatello, ID

Y Grad / Y Dad
Richland, WA
WACPaddingOurSchedule
pocatello, ID

Go back and re-read the statement. "Two football programs" "22 athletic departments". One statement does not, necessarily, invalidate the other.

________

Hello! Football drives a majority of athletic departments financially. There is a difference between revenue and profit. Seriously doubt that BYU generates more revenue and/or makes more profit than TX, MI, AL, AU, FL, ND, Ohio St., NE, LSU.

BYU_Convert
Provo, UT

This was coming for some time now. From the "Sisters of the Poor" comment by the former Ohio $tate president, to the arrogance combined with fear displayed by the commissioners of the so-called "$elect Five" conferences. In the end players go to the money-hungry schools for a ticket to the NFL. That is their compensation, and they need no other. If the $elect Five conferences insists on paying players, then there needs to be a risk assessment done. For example, by breaking NCAA statutes to pay players you either face VERY HARD sanctions by the NCAA until you are no longer paying your players, or you leave the NCAA, but in doing so, you are not governed by a tax-exempt organization, and any school who leaves the NCAA or NAIA or any other organization that exists for the equity and integrity of sport and competition should lose tax-exempt status. The multi-million dollar corporations of the $EC, Big Tweleventeen, and the other three lesser of the $elect Five conferences should be heavily taxed by the IRS. Schools exist to educate and create upstanding citizens, not to sponsor sports franchises that make more money than Fortune 500 companies.

BYU_Convert
Provo, UT

RedRocks said:

"If this happens look for another reduction in 5-10 years when the elite want to cut out the Vanderbilts, Washington States, the Utahs etc."

That will never happen especially on Vanderbilt's account. If the $EC kicked out Vanderbilt--its most academically prestigious institution who's athletes are actually book smart--it would show that the $EC is interested in athletic dominance over academic integrity. This would be damaging to the $EC's image especially in court.

EdGrady
Idaho Falls, ID

The NFL never looked better.

3grandslams
Iowa City, IA

Landon, I guess you forgot the first real BSC buster, it was BYU. Two games that drove these conferences crazy, BYU 1984 National Champions and BYU 1996 Cotton Bowl Champions, especially in 1996, that's when they discovered their guidelines to keep smaller schools out weren't tough enough.

Now thanks to Utah, Boise etc. (these are the only real bsc busters, Boise has the best tradition by far) they are freaking out again.

Go Cougars!

3grandslams
Iowa City, IA

Obviously these 5 conf. don't like Obama and his idea of sharing the wealth, they want all the wealth to themselves (I guess that is sort of like Obama...anyhow), I wish the NCAA would cut them off, the them have college athletics without the support of the NCAA and the NCAA take the remainder teams, create a playoff and make billions!

Suddenly these "greed" conference would need to get their own contracts, tv rights etc. They have become a cancer, cut them out.

3grandslams
Iowa City, IA

Lets even be more honest and stop listening to "equity" arguments, the cost of living stipend is really a signing bonus. They will not be across the board but will grow depending on the talent the school is trying to attract. In essence is a nasty way the "greed" conferences are trying to recruit players. It is disgusting and dishonest.

Everyone can see it, no one wants to admit it.

Dutchman
Murray, UT

3Grandslams, BYU Covert et al,

There is really nothing new in terms of upper echelon teams separating themselves from the bottom half. The five big conferences represent about 62 schools. Back in the day before SCOTUS broke it up the College Football Association (CFA) had 64 members, most of them the same schools as currently in the Big 5 and they as a group negotiated their own TV deals as a group. The CFA was created in 1977. So you see, things don't change much. The size of the group is about the same as in 1977. Back then Utah and BYU were included in the CFA. The goal was the same, separation from the lower half. The CFA disbanded when the SEC left and created its own TV deal with CBS. Everyone else followed suit. So to disparage the Big 5 now is a little disingenuous. Cutting the group size down to 32 or so in the future will be difficult to do because all these teams are contractually tied to their conferences and in most cases have given up their own TV rights to the conference. To unwind those agreements would be very difficult.

jdub1942
PROVO, UT

I guess what gets me is that I am in the military and have been deployed and the (expletive) United States Air Force doesn't give me as much for school, as the schools are giving to athletes right now. Paying players? The schools are already giving them boatloads of money by paying for their educations, meanwhile inflating their grades.
Living stipend? the players already get money for housing (or free housing) food and clothing. So much so they wouldn't even have enough room in their closets to fit all the clothing if they actually chose to spend it on that.
So what these college kids are poor? 99% of college kids are poor, myself included.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments