Peavler: College football is on the wrong track with autonomy vote

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Jeremy234 SLC, UT
    Aug. 12, 2014 11:38 a.m.

    If you put BC, Indiana or Colorado in any mid-major conference, any one of those would go undefeated.

  • Jeremy234 SLC, UT
    Aug. 12, 2014 11:35 a.m.

    Leave the system alone. The power conferences deserve it.

  • Cougsndawgs West Point , UT
    Aug. 10, 2014 2:18 p.m.

    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 some people.

  • Cougsndawgs West Point , UT
    Aug. 10, 2014 1:40 p.m.

    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.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Aug. 10, 2014 12:02 p.m.

    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.?

  • Naval Vet Philadelphia, PA
    Aug. 9, 2014 11:53 p.m.

    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.

  • 81Ute Central, UT
    Aug. 9, 2014 9:23 p.m.

    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.

  • MyPerspective Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 9, 2014 5:56 p.m.

    West 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.

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 9, 2014 1:44 p.m.

    ... Continued

    What 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.

  • MyPerspective Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 9, 2014 11:05 a.m.

    Mission Viejo, CA

    That'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 they have always done.

  • SoonerUte Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 9, 2014 9:50 a.m.

    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.

  • Cougsndawgs West Point , UT
    Aug. 9, 2014 9:27 a.m.

    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

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 9, 2014 8:00 a.m.

    "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 Peavler

    So 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.

  • MyPerspective Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 9, 2014 7:51 a.m.

    Las 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?

  • BlueHusky Mission Viejo, CA
    Aug. 9, 2014 6:47 a.m.

    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.

  • LouisD Las Vegas, NV
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:48 p.m.

    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 settle.

  • esodije ALBUQUERQUE, NM
    Aug. 8, 2014 9:57 p.m.

    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.

  • TheGreatPAC12 Salt Lake City, 00
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:57 p.m.

    All that matters is the UTES are in baby!

    Go Utes
    Go PAC12

  • 32843 PROVO, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 7:43 p.m.

    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.

  • Sanefan Wellsville, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 7:41 p.m.

    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 exciting!

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 6:53 p.m.


    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.

  • IRS Agent PROVO, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 6:07 p.m.

    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 considered.

  • the greater truth Bountiful, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 6:03 p.m.


    The 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.

  • Balan South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 5:44 p.m.

    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.

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    Aug. 8, 2014 5:43 p.m.

    "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"


    uhmmm no. The story is clearly about bYu or laffy wouldn't have written it. bYu is five years away from rexburg

  • But seriously folks! Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 5:41 p.m.

    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

  • SEC Rules Seminole, FL
    Aug. 8, 2014 5:19 p.m.

    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 Feudalism.

  • Danite Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 5:16 p.m.

    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.

  • motorbike Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:43 p.m.

    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.

  • don17 Temecula, CA
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:32 p.m.

    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!

  • Frankness TALLAHASSEE, FL
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:26 p.m.

    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!

  • BayAreaCougar Pleasanton, CA
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:20 p.m.

    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.

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:11 p.m.

    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.

  • JDL Magna, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:09 p.m.

    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?

  • Condescending Wonka Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:05 p.m.

    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.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 3:58 p.m.

    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.

  • RSL* Why, AZ
    Aug. 8, 2014 3:46 p.m.

    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 Universities.

  • Danite Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 3:44 p.m.

    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.

  • Invisible Hand Provo, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 3:12 p.m.

    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.