If you put BC, Indiana or Colorado in any mid-major conference, any one of those
would go undefeated.
Leave the system alone. The power conferences deserve it.
MP:Also, you never explained why promotion and relegation wouldn't
work. Even if CFB ebbed & flowed as much as you say, that type of system
would be perfect to accommodate those ebbs and flows. If a program is struggling
they are relegated to the lower division until they earn their way back up.
Again this would allow those programs that deserve to be in the "power
5" division to be there, while those who are an "embarrassment"
wouldn't be allowed, but could earn their way back up. And I
never said anything against Utah, yet you read everything I said as sour
grapes...shaking my head. I'm amazed at how narrow the vision can be for
MyPerspective:While disparaging BYU you choose to ignore Utah's
quandaries with this ruling and attribute real possibilities to my sour
grapes?Typical."...this is college football and today's
premier team is tomorrow's embarrassment. It ebbs and flows just like any
other cycle."MP are you aware of how many programs have won the
national championship over the last 50 years? No it doesn't ebb and flow as
much as you think. Bama, Georgia, Florida, LSU will always be the big dogs in
the SEC.,,Kentucky and Vandy never will be. The big money makers have been
established. Those 25-30 schools will always be on top, "whether you like it
or not"."Your complaints might have merit if you gave a hoot
about D2 programs but you are just sour grapes."Sour grapes or
reality? The power programs will use this disparity to further separate
themselves. Big dogs won't be happy with equal revenue sharing in the
future. Maybe think about that effect on Utah instead of trying to shrug my
arguments off as sour grapes. I'm a Georgia fan also...and they're in
the elite group, unlike U.
For those of you talking about splitting divisions, that would assume that the
best lower division team is worse than the worst upper division team.Does anybody really believe that schools like Colorado, Vanderbilt, Purdue,
etc. are better than Boise State, NIU, BYU, etc.?
I wouldn't mind seeing P5 schools scheduling ONLY other P5 schools in the
future, but at the very LEAST, I'd like to see FBS schools discontinuing
scheduling FCS schools.
It is very suprising and sad to read these comments if they are a direct result
of the knowledge base regarding university athletics of Desnews readership. It
is also easily determined those who cheer for blue are. Good luck.
CougsndawgsWest Point , UT"It's difficult to imagine
ideas to fix it since this elitism and myopia seem deeply entrenched in the
power programs (I'm talking about the Alabamas, Georgias, USCs, Ohio
States, and Texases of the world not the coat tail clingers of the supposed
power 5)."What you should be talking about, Cougsndawgs, is
ANYONE receiving a check from ESPN, FOX, etc."That way you get
rid of the bottom feeders that have no business being considered a P5
program." Do you know why that won't work, Cougsndawgs?
Because this is college football and today's premier team is
tomorrow's embarrassment. It ebbs and flows just like any other cycle.
The P5 is at the top whether you like it or not. "...P5
conferences are stuck in their archaic ways and want nothing to do with progress
or equity...which I find hilarious because they have equal revenue sharing but
want to use capitalist ideas to exclude others." You are
right...that is funny. Your complaints might have merit if you gave a hoot
about D2 programs but you are just sour grapes.
... ContinuedWhat they should do is have a clean split into P5, D1,
and D2.Then expand the playoffs to 8 teams, with one spot open for a
top 8 D1 school. Also allow D1 schools access to one major bowl game.This is similar to the BCS system where it gave a legit chance for
mid-majors to prove themselves where only Utah and TCU finished in the top 6
TWICE in 16 years to auto-qualify for a BCS bowl game.
BlueHuskyMission Viejo, CAThat's how you read the
ruling...each team sets their own stipend? Autonomy to set specific rules was
given to the conferences, not individual schools. The bigger question is
whether the Commissioners and Athletic Directors across the P5 set a universal
standard or if they'll leave it up to the individual conferences. If the
P5 act as one, the ground work is immediately established to form a new division
in college football. As a byu fan, that's really what you are concerned
about, isn't it? Yesterday's ruling will ultimately
result in a new division of college football. Utah will be just fine (thanks
for your concern). byu will be just fine as a mid-major playing a mid-major
schedule as they have always done. Further, byu fans will be just fine as they
will still be able to look down their nose at D2 programs...as they have always
Autonomy has nothing to do with the straw poll of coaches about their schedule
preferences. Conferences could already set schedule "demands". Its
unlikely that an all P5 schedule will emerge. It was just a poll. Still, I
understand by BYU fears that happening - it makes their poor choice even worse.
I think in the end it's obvious that greed and elitism are ruining CFB.
It's difficult to imagine ideas to fix it since this elitism and myopia
seem deeply entrenched in the power programs (I'm talking about the
Alabamas, Georgias, USCs, Ohio States, and Texases of the world not the coat
tail clingers of the supposed power 5).As for competition I think
the NCAA should adopt the system that soccer has in it's premier leagues.
You have promotion and relegation. Every year the best 5 non P5 teams should be
promoted to the higher division and the worst 5 should be relegated to the
lesser division and have to earn their way back into the upper division. That
way you get rid of the bottom feeders that have no business being considered a
P5 program. I honestly think under such a system both BYU and Utah would keep
themselves in the upper division. Of course none of that would
happen because P5 conferences are stuck in their archaic ways and want nothing
to do with progress or equity...which I find hilarious because they have equal
revenue sharing but want to use capitalist ideas to exclude others. Lol
"Now, this story isn’t about BYU. Much has and will be said about how
the Cougars will adapt to this new reality in college football. That story will
wait for another day." -- Lafe PeavlerSo will the Big 12
invite... if that happens, "this story" won't see another day.Again, this is no different from the split between D1 (the haves) and D2
(the have nots) that occurred in 1973. I don't see any argument being made
for D2 schools. Why is it so bad to have another split in college
football, I don't see why mid-majors can't thrive in this new model
like the D2 schools have.The only thing I agree with the author is
only playing P5 teams, which will hurt smaller programs from playing
"money" games with major programs.
LouisDLas Vegas, NV"BYU will make that happen, will step
up to the P5 LEVEL. BUT it may become a P6 or P7." So,
according to you, every program / conference that "steps up" will
automatically be considered a P(x) program? Let's explore this
a bit. When the current P5s ultimately move to make their schedules exclusively
between power conferences, there will be 7 conferences (everyone who has
'stepped up' including byu) in the mix. Said another way, breaking
into the Power group is simply 'stepping up' to the new autonomy
rules. Is that what you are telling this board?
I see a couple of scenarios. One is in recuriting. This will be reality:"Come to Utah! We'll pay you $1000 for expenses!""Come to Washington! We'll pay you $5000 for expenses!"..."Come to Oregon! We have Nike money! We'll pay you $10,000
for expenses!""Come to USC! We'll pay you
$12,000!""Naw, come to 'Bama! We'll pay you
$25,000 and throw in a car!"Scenario 2:Title IX will
force equal spending on women's sports. "We can't afford
men's olympic sports other than basketball"Scenario 3:The 16-team playoff in the Group of 5 had 20 million viewers on cable.The Power5 championship, Alabama vs Texas has 5 million viewers on network tv.
The author incorrectly assumes the demise based on some NFL like assemblage of
free agent athletes. That isn't going to happen. Payments will be very
limited, around $2500, plus better disability insurance and full cost to attend.
At BYU its probably less than $4k/athlete per year, perhaps $1.2-1.5
million/year. BYU will make that happen, will step up to the P5 LEVEL. BUT it
may become a P6 or P7. The verbiage opened up the adoption of P5 rules to other
conferences and programs. I suspect the AAC and MWC may very well step right up
and agree to the same rules. We could end up with 7 true Power conferences plus
Notre Dame and BYU (90 total teams, not 64). The P5 could NOT get full NCAA FBS
approval without that as part of their agreement. Watch things change, not
I think the top-tier poo-bahs at the NCAA are getting bought off big-time;
nothing else explains the huge betrayal of the "student-athlete" ideal,
illusory though it's always been. It doesn't stop here, however; the
schools who benefit from this will also have to buy off a lot of senators and
congressmen (not to mention federal judges), because congressional preemption is
on its way otherwise. If Barack Obama really believed in income redistribution,
he'd issue an executive order tomorrow morning appointing a college-sports
czar, or at least a special prosecutor to into corruption in the NCAA. I
don't think the NCAA is any better than FIFA or the IOC in that regard.
All that matters is the UTES are in baby!Go UtesGo PAC12
Obvious to most unbiased observers is the fact that this decision is horribly
bad for college football as a whole. The only people in favor of this are the
people who stand to benefit most from it. It won't be until after the
unintended consequences, which will surely follow, begin to have their impact
(even on the so called untouchable "elite")that enough people will say
"enough!" and remove these decisions from those whose greed ruined the
game millions love. In fact, it will be because millions love this game so much
that eventually government intervention will occur. And that may be exactly
what needs to happen.From all the comments so far, I think IRS Agent
has the beginnings of the right idea. Remove money from the equation and you
begin to get the decision makers thinking along the lines of what's best
for college football. Until then, all the decisions having to do with CFB will
be made with with how much money will be made or lost in mind, not what is good
for college football, or its fans.
According to the USA Today Pre-Season poll, only half of the P5 teams are ranked
in the top 65, the other half are non P5 teams. They have Utah at 66, USU at
46, and BYU at 34. So......? The sad thing about the State of Affairs in
College football is that not only will there be a huge division amongst the
Conferences; there will also be a huge division within the conferences! The
haves Alabama, Ohio, FSU, Oregon and so on will dominate college football and
everyone else will be relegated to either fodder or spectator. So sad! Guess
I'll take up fishing in the Fall to spend my time, it will be a lot more
motorbike,We don't know for sure how Indiana, Colorado, etc.
will fare in a mid-major league, and likewise you can't be certain that
teams like BYU, Central Florida, or Boise State would fare in a P5 conference.
Any guesses you have is pure speculation.The P5 does not necessarily
have the 65 best teams in the nation.
The solution is simple. Take the money out of the equation for the decision
makers. Make "college football" the product, not individual teams. All
monies generated whether through TV contracts, marketing, etc. would be pooled
and divided equally among all participating schools. The money could then be
used as the schools see fit to use it. The different divisions (I,
II and III) could be maintained to encourage competition among schools with
similar talent levels and divide the revenues from their play. The change would
encourage fair competition and would create even greater parity. Teams could
play a nine game schedule, concluding at the end of November, with each
conference sending their champion to the playoffs (16 teams total). Other
schools would be invited at large to bowl games to create intriguing match-ups
(Army/Navy, regional rivalries, out of conference games, etc.).No
more "haves" and "have-nots". Just pure collegiate football
competition. The problem is, it is way too logical, so it would never be
@motorbikeThe problem under the new system teams like Central
Florida, Boise State and Northern Illinois will never be give the opportunity to
prove themselves, and recruit on and equal basis to the p5 teams, unlike
Indiana, Boston College or Colorado.IF you re a division 1 team then
you should be treated equal to ALL other division 1 teams, and recruit on an
equal basis with all division 1 teams.
Motorbike - So rational = Utah fans. Ya right. . .And if UCF, BSU
or NI played Indiana, Boston College or Colorado's schedule year in and
year out, guarantee that they would be equal to or greater than the bottom
dwellers of the P5.You logic is well, illogical.
"Now, this story isn’t about BYU. Much has and will be said about how
the Cougars will adapt to this new reality in college football. That story will
wait for another day"Laffeuhmmm no. The story is
clearly about bYu or laffy wouldn't have written it. bYu is five years
away from rexburg
I see the power conferences dropping the dead weight at the bottom and adding
some of the other top-tier programs in the country. this does not bode well for
Utah. They will on the outside looking in as the top pac programs gobble up the
bottom feeders and spit them out. Bye Bye, WSU, Colorado, and Utah
The have nots should create their own league. Then Let them crown their true
champion , and play them against the Money 5 champion. Let all of this chaos
be settled on the gridiron. But, the Money 5 will never go for that.
They detest the "Cinderella" concept, the "Rocky Story".
They were embarrassed too many times by the likes of BYU, UCF and Boise State.
The system in place now is now is nothing more than Football
Thie issue is not that the Power 5 contain the best 65 teams, I would think
anyone would admit that BYU for example is better than Kansas in football. The
issue is about sameness of competition. Every P5 has great, good and bad teams
in their conferences but there is much more parity within each P5 than the rest
of college football as a whole. Contrast BYU and Idaho (top and bottom of non
P5) there is a great divide. Utah at the bottom of the PAC12 and Stanford at the
top, a divide?: Yes but not much of one.It would be nice to get the
best overall programs together and have them play each other (BYU included) but
the reality is they're not in one of the P5 conferences and until they are
they'll be excluded. It's not perfect but it's the best that can
realistically be done today.
Author: "Does anyone really want to debate that teams such as Central
Florida, Boise State and Northern Illinois are really lesser programs than
Indiana, Boston College or Colorado?"Answer: Yes, there are a
lot of rational thinkers that would debate this with you and have a strong
argument, this is the exact reason P5 autonomy is now a reality. Bottom line...
if Indiana, Boston College and Colorado played the schedules of Central Florida,
Boise State and Northern Illinois then you'd no longer be using Indiana,
Boston College and Colorado as your examples.
So in 2012 the SEC brought in 273 million dollars and they want to be part of
the big 5 and only the big 5 conferences. Lets put this idea with it's
claimed benefits into perspective:1. If it is all about supporting
and promoting student athlete's then what will happen with the estimated
40,000 athletes from non big 5 conferences when their main supporting
program(football)ends? No more scholarships!2 The SEC and the other
conferences should recruit Harvard University to join a conference since they
bring in yearly through their endowement fund 6,400,000,000 dollars. That is
right six point four billion dollars! Now that is perspective.3. Who
cares about Mississippi State the University of Mississippi, Kansas, Purdue,
Indiana or any other program weak in football and basketball now. Soon the big
teams like Alabama, Oklahoma and Texas won't want anything to do with them
draining funds from them. 4. College basketball draws because
everyone feels like they have a chance including teams like Belmont, Pacific,
Yale etc. 5. College football ratings will drop when only 8 or 10
schools are scene with a chance!6 Soon schools will scrap their
stadiums and send the steel to China and jobs will disappear!
It's unfortunate that we have so much power concentrated in the hands of a
few, making sweeping changes everywhere. Some of these "Power 5"
conferences contain numerous teams that had tiny bleachers composed of steel
erector linkages just as recent as 1990's and coaches coming and going
every five years, but now they're dictating rules to not just throughout
the NCAA but to all of us. We're the customers, and no one ever asked
us?Many of us could care less about the NHL, NFL, NBA, Or the other
pro leagues that rise and fail. We care about our schools and the communities
they serve. These NCAA changes need to be stopped! My guess is that we have
serious intimidation going on at a high level and it's corrupt, anything
other than transparent or accountable!
Anyone who thinks that the "Power 5" conferences contain the top 65
football teams is fooling themselves. The question is how do you
determine who are the top teams and where do you draw the line. Do you say it
takes a winning record to be a top team? Since it is a zero sum game by default
half of your teams are losing teams (if you only play amongst yourselves). You could take the European futbol league approach, where consistently
losing teams are dropped to lower leagues and teams in lower leagues that
consistently win move up to higher leagues. A fairer arrangement but not
feasible with college football. No one can argue that the top teams
in the P5 leagues are the best football teams. But very few teams can say that
they are year in and year out the best team in their league. That is the beauty
of college football. Narrowing the field seems like a good idea, but
are we trying to create a minor league to the professionals? How many people
care about AA or AAA baseball or the developmental NBA league? I can
see that easily being the future of college football.
The statements about tax dollars going to athletic departments may be true at
some schools but it is not true at the U. The state appropriates no money to the
U that can be used for collegiate athletics. The state won't even share in
the funding of a student rec center at the U that is entirely for student use.
A class action lawsuit by 2 million fans @ $10.00 each and a war chest of $20
million dollars against the BIG 5 conferences and personally name in the suit
the conference commissioner, every schools AD and every head coach, include the
NCAA and all major sports networks and force them to defend themselves and see
how much money they all have left. Couple that with an anti trust class action
lawsuit by 65 D-1 universities and then another by fifty state Attorneys General
and it would force the NCAA and the BIG 5 to end the nonsense and possibly to
adopt the drop out / play in system the world soccer clubs use and then any
school in the country has access to a new playoff system. But that
makes too much sense, right?
The solution to all of this is simple: if you don't like what's
happening with college football, stop feeding into the multi-billion dollar
industry and not watch it (or write articles. I'm looking at you, Peavler).
I'm surprised college athletes haven't been paid sooner. Often times, to the detriment of personal privacy, academics and their health,
athletes at the collegiate level sacrifice more than it's rationally worth
to continue honing their craft. They do it because it's what they love,
being paid or not. But the idea that many of us want these athletes to continue
to entertain the collective lot of us for free is just as un-American as keeping
out the would be Cinderellas. If colleges aren't willing to shell out just
a little extra to its players who get the university's brand out through
competition (more free advertising), then maybe they shouldn't have
athletic programs in the first place.
The simple reality is the NFL does not have a farm system, like major league
baseball.The highest tier of college football is loosely akin to
Triple A baseball. Teams in the other, non-P5 conferences are like AA
baseball.What the author suggests is an open playoff, like on the
movie Hoosiers, the high school basketball tournament in Indiana that includes
all the different levels of high schools, from 1A up through 5A.Why
not have an "open" playoff in football, that includes high school, small
college, G5, P5 and the NFL? This idea is completely absurd.Why not
include Div II and Div III college football in a great big tournament to decide
the college football champs from all over the nation? This idea is almost as
absurd. The mismatches involved would be completely un-American.Utah fans and TCU fans have learned the hard way that our Cinderella seasons
were not even close to the level of difficulty of playing in a P5 conference.Start accepting reality.
The big question is how this is going to affect tuition rates and taxes. With
Title 9 and other NCAA rules you just cant give football players the $2,000 to
$5,000, you will have to give all student athletes the same amount. Some schools
have up to or more than 500 student athletes. That can range from $1,000,000 to
$2,500,00 a year in cost without counting health coverage which could easily
double that cost. And that is not even counting the usual scholarship costs. The
USU & UoU tuition rates have been increasing because of their football
programs. Is it worth kids getting to much in debt because they and the tax
payers are sustaining sport programs like football that are not running in the
black. Time to change to intramural system for all Utah
So what's the solution? I heard a lot of complaining from this writer but
no realistic alternatives. College football is very complex to navigate and easy
answers are hard to come by. Some throw out things like "a
playoff is the only way and it has to include 16 teams". Well, if you do
that you can't be finished before the 2nd semester of school starts and you
disrupt the bowl system that so many love and desire.From a
competitive stand point I'm torn. Utah is a perfect example. Looking back
at the 2004 undefeated season, I don't think last years (bowl ineligible)
team would have lost to any teams on that schedule. The reality was, instead of
winning 11 games (guessing admittedly) against MWC teams Utah was 5-7 last year.
Competition matters! And the more the competiton is the same, the easier it is
to measure against others. We'll never have a tournament in football so
there will always be a subjective measurement of who gets into the playoff and
the more scheduling is congruent, the easier it will be to choose who deserves
to get in. That's reality.
It's time to drop the charade of "student athletics". Those schools
that can afford it should just admit that they sponsor semi-professional farm
teams for the NFL. Let them pay their players and stop expecting them to attend
classes. We need to stop giving them state subsidies. The Alabama football team
for instance should operate independent of the university and pay rent for the
facilities. Any football team that couldn't afford to compete in such a
league could form a lower division of club teams, but spending public money to
subsidize this needs to stop.