Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
That seems unlikely.
Media deals are built off of inventory (games) and markets/eyeballs. Generally, more of both should be better, though it does depend what the average is. If NDSU joins Oregon and Washington we would pull the average payout down, and it would cost them. I'm less certain that is true with schools like Wyoming and Nevada. However, it partly depends what schools are left and the average media/market size of those schools compared to ours.
One thing you would add to the mix is 'some' extra viewers out of the Pacific and Mountain time zone. The MW doesn't get a whole lot of interest outside of their own region. There is some value to that. However, tv providers and streamers do not value the MW much at all. The deals are not based upon individual schools like Boise and SDSU. It is based upon the conference as a single entity. Boise gets a little bump but that extra money comes from the the rest of the conference, not the providers. Nobody in the MW is getting rich.
If you want to be FBS and you want to play MW schools it works. If you want to be a national program, it doesn't.
If the MW does add you would be down the list a bit. One of the hurdles is you have no history or familiarity with MW. Every school in the MW was in the WAC at one time. So were Utep, Texas State, NMSU and La Tech. They are a known quantity. SMU, UTSA, Tulsa, and Rice were Wacsters too. North Texas was in the Big West with several MW schools. They would be hard to get but not impossible.
There are options..
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigLakeBison
If you’re wondering why you get pushback in this thread, this is it. You do a very poor job of articulating your point and you constantly talk in circles. You’re a doomsday prepper in regards to FBS. You see the worst possible scenario and your brain locks in on it. You then build these wild defense mechanism ideas to offset the worst case scenario. The reality is Johnson v NCAA isn’t going to play out as negatively as you think and the new northern G5 conference isn’t going to happen anytime soon. It is going to happen gradually over several decades and someone is going to be first. NDSU is at the top of the list to be the first and get the ball rolling. If in order to make FBS work we need to move all 4 Dakotas at once, then I will not watch NDSU play FBS football in my lifetime.
The only reason you think I talk in circles is because you straight up lie about what I said then compare that against what I did say.
As far as doomsday, were you around for any of the flood years? We started sandbagging long before the water was flowing down streets. Same thing here. Pay for play is coming and you can choose to be ready for it or not. Alston was a 9-0 SCOTUS decision. Johnson is in the 3rd Circuit, not some local small claims court. California assembly recently passed a revenue sharing bill that'll probably be passed by the senate and signed by the governor by the end of the year. House v NCAA is trying to get that nationwide. Nick Saban is calling for a players union. The Patriot League said they'll shut down before paying players. I didn't pull any of this out of thin air, it's happening whether you or I want it or not. Only question is how broad or narrow the policy will be.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
This is probably a stupid questions but if college athletes become state employees, aren't the state schools are only legally mandated to pay minimum wage. Could the schools, as a requirement of employment have the athletes to pay at least a portion of their scholarships? As employees they would be required to show up to practice, games etc but would they be required to go to class?..Would they be required to progress towards graduation?
It seems like a lot of stuff would have to be worked out before this happens.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
One thing you would add to the mix is 'some' extra viewers out of the Pacific and Mountain time zone. The MW doesn't get a whole lot of interest outside of their own region. There is some value to that. However, tv providers and streamers do not value the MW much at all. The deals are not based upon individual schools like Boise and SDSU. It is based upon the conference as a single entity. Boise gets a little bump but that extra money comes from the the rest of the conference, not the providers. Nobody in the MW is getting rich.
If you want to be FBS and you want to play MW schools it works. If you want to be a national program, it doesn't.
If the MW does add you would be down the list a bit. One of the hurdles is you have no history or familiarity with MW. Every school in the MW was in the WAC at one time. So were Utep, Texas State, NMSU and La Tech. They are a known quantity. SMU, UTSA, Tulsa, and Rice were Wacsters too. North Texas was in the Big West with several MW schools. They would be hard to get but not impossible.
There are options..
I think the mountain west in a situation where it loses SDSU and UNLV or another school would have a hard time grabbing schools out of the AAC, right? If so, the only other schools are CUSA schools?
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
This is probably a stupid questions but if college athletes become state employees, aren't the state schools are only legally mandated to pay minimum wage. Could the schools, as a requirement of employment have the athletes to pay at least a portion of their scholarships? As employees they would be required to show up to practice, games etc but would they be required to go to class?..Would they be required to progress towards graduation?
It seems like a lot of stuff would have to be worked out before this happens.
These are all complications that I think ultimately would end college athletics as we know it. It would push athletics at that level to private clubs/minor leagues and college athletics would be similar to D3 today.
To the athletes, careful what you ask for. You may get it. And it won't be what you thought it would be.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
I think the mountain west in a situation where it loses SDSU and UNLV or another school would have a hard time grabbing schools out of the AAC, right? If so, the only other schools are CUSA schools?
I agree..Very tough indeed.The only way it might happen is if the AAC loses schools too..
As for CUSA.. I would be fine with the MW adding Texas State and UTEP if they chose to do that..I actually think they would not add anybody unless it got down to 8 football schools..That would leave only 7 oly sports members..There are plenty of basketball schools in the region..That would be an easy backfill. That might leave spot for a football only invitation to get back up to 9. That is the ideal number for 8 conference games.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
This is probably a stupid questions but if college athletes become state employees, aren't the state schools are only legally mandated to pay minimum wage. Could the schools, as a requirement of employment have the athletes to pay at least a portion of their scholarships? As employees they would be required to show up to practice, games etc but would they be required to go to class?..Would they be required to progress towards graduation?
It seems like a lot of stuff would have to be worked out before this happens.
I’m not sure there would be any serious issues. They’d be both employees and students. Lots of people are in that same situation already.
Not sure what the minimum wage has to do with anything. University employees are some of the best compensated state employees.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bisonaudit
I’m not sure there would be any serious issues. They’d be both employees and students. Lots of people are in that same situation already.
Not sure what the minimum wage has to do with anything. University employees are some of the best compensated state employees.
State Universities would only be required by law to pay at least minimum wage. They could pay more to the athletes if they wanted to. But they don't have to.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
State Universities would only be required by law to pay at least minimum wage. They could pay more to the athletes if they wanted to. But they don't have to.
What’s your point? Nobody pays anyone more than the legal minimum just because they want to.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bisonaudit
What’s your point? Nobody pays anyone more than the legal minimum just because they want to.
The players want to be considered employees. The schools simply do not have to pay them as much as an NL deal which comes from boosters. I do not know why the athletes are pursuing this path..If I were a school president I would welcome the employee model and do away with the scholarships..If your 'job' is to be a football player you don't even have to be a student..
