The Swamp

Posted: **Tue Aug 11, 2020 2:19 pm**

Spring football could be fantastic.

Posted: **Tue Aug 11, 2020 2:38 pm**

Just gonna be a bit of a broken record: If they push football to the spring, they are going to have very tough choices about what other sports get the same treatment. The logistics for many schools make this proposition very difficult.

One basic issue: Trainers. Teams are required to have a trainer, in many instances multiple trainers on the field. For practice. Let alone games. That's an insurance/liability issue that can't be messed with on any level.

Just saying, there's not an unlimited supply of resources for these ADs. Tough choices are going to be made (whether it's deciding only football gets pushed-->cancelling some Spring sports to allow for football to be pushed to Spring.)

Posted: **Tue Aug 11, 2020 3:36 pm**

And the Pac-12 follows...

Posted: **Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:36 pm**

GOP candidates in close races are running out of TV events that will have white folks' attention this fall.

The US Open and FedEx Cup are going to be 100% political ads.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 10:34 am**

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 9:55 pm
DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 8:11 pm
Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 7:45 pm Boise State furloughed its coaches earlier this year so no, contracts are not the barrier here
Are there any potential public/private school issues that would affect this (although I imagine the private school coaches would go along with a short-term furlough for the PR angle)?
I can't think of any glaring ones right now, but I've also been working way too long for a day I was supposed to have off. So maybe I'll think of something in the morning.

The benefit for private coaches is that they don't have their contracts released publicly in the USA Today database like every public school. But the "I took a 5% pay cut" is a nice thing to tout in a time like this.

You can set your watch to the day when university tax returns become available in Syracuse for the annual "these are the university employees who make the most money" story in the paper.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:35 am**

Big 12 insists they're playing no matter what. Gonna be a fascinating three or four weeks since SEC and ACC seem determined as well. If the pro sports leagues can't pull it off without a bubble, I'm dubious that the kind of dipshits who run Baylor and Texas Tech (no offense intended, but look at the track record) are gonna be able to pull this off.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:04 pm**

brian wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:35 am Big 12 insists they're playing no matter what. Gonna be a fascinating three or four weeks since SEC and ACC seem determined as well. If the pro sports leagues can't pull it off without a bubble, I'm dubious that the kind of dipshits who run Baylor and Texas Tech (no offense intended, but look at the track record) are gonna be able to pull this off.

Yeah, Rutgers and MSU (apparently) helped seal the deal for the B1G.

I keep coming back to the long-term side-effects of those who get and are asymptomatic. These guys are already concussing themselves into Bolivia, I guess shaving off some years due to damage lung and heart tissue isn't too much to ask, right?

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:16 pm**

brian wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:35 am Big 12 insists they're playing no matter what. Gonna be a fascinating three or four weeks since SEC and ACC seem determined as well. If the pro sports leagues can't pull it off without a bubble, I'm dubious that the kind of dipshits who run Baylor and Texas Tech (no offense intended, but look at the track record) are gonna be able to pull this off.

Baylor probably preemptively planting weed in all their players' dorms.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:07 pm**

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:04 pm
brian wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:35 am Big 12 insists they're playing no matter what. Gonna be a fascinating three or four weeks since SEC and ACC seem determined as well. If the pro sports leagues can't pull it off without a bubble, I'm dubious that the kind of dipshits who run Baylor and Texas Tech (no offense intended, but look at the track record) are gonna be able to pull this off.
Yeah, Rutgers and MSU (apparently) helped seal the deal for the B1G.

I keep coming back to the long-term side-effects of those who get and are asymptomatic. These guys are already concussing themselves into Bolivia, I guess shaving off some years due to damage lung and heart tissue isn't too much to ask, right?

I am already awaiting the “I need college football” crowd blaming the players for not following rules (whether they did or not is irrelevant) when games get canceled, followed by their shrugs of indifference when kids lose pro football playing careers due to internal organ issues.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:31 pm**

DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:07 pm I am already awaiting the “I need college football” crowd blaming the players for not following rules (whether they did or not is irrelevant) when games get canceled, followed by their shrugs of indifference when kids lose pro football playing careers due to internal organ issues.

Two things I've seen/read that I don't get about this:

People who say that sportswiters are 'cheering' for the cancellation of the season. Why would a writer who's job depends on a sport be happy when it is postponed/cancelled?

The people who are saying how much money the Universities are going to lose, and how bad that will be for the schools, even beyond the Athetic departments. If a big university is so dependent on football $$$, isn't that saying that something is wrong with how schools are run?

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:39 pm**

DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:07 pmI am already awaiting the “I need college football” crowd blaming the players for not following rules (whether they did or not is irrelevant) when games get canceled, followed by their shrugs of indifference when kids lose pro football playing careers due to internal organ issues.

They knew the risks.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 3:00 pm**

DaveInSeattle wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:31 pm
DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:07 pm I am already awaiting the “I need college football” crowd blaming the players for not following rules (whether they did or not is irrelevant) when games get canceled, followed by their shrugs of indifference when kids lose pro football playing careers due to internal organ issues.
Two things I've seen/read that I don't get about this:

People who say that sportswiters are 'cheering' for the cancellation of the season. Why would a writer who's job depends on a sport be happy when it is postponed/cancelled?

The people who are saying how much money the Universities are going to lose, and how bad that will be for the schools, even beyond the Athetic departments. If a big university is so dependent on football $$$, isn't that saying that something is wrong with how schools are run?

Yes as in why are they in the elite athletics BUSINESS at all. That said, if football goes down so does financing for every men's nonrevenue sports and most all women's sports. Can they even play the year?

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:02 pm**

DaveInSeattle wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:31 pm
DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:07 pm I am already awaiting the “I need college football” crowd blaming the players for not following rules (whether they did or not is irrelevant) when games get canceled, followed by their shrugs of indifference when kids lose pro football playing careers due to internal organ issues.
Two things I've seen/read that I don't get about this:

People who say that sportswiters are 'cheering' for the cancellation of the season. Why would a writer who's job depends on a sport be happy when it is postponed/cancelled?

it's insipid

The people who are saying how much money the Universities are going to lose, and how bad that will be for the schools, even beyond the Athetic departments. If a big university is so dependent on football $$$, isn't that saying that something is wrong with how schools are run?

[/quote]
athletic departments are run as non-profits and basically spend all the money they have. running a prominent athletic department has been a very stable business model -- but these aren't businesses because the players aren't employees! -- for the past 25 years. I'm not excusing that, of course, but merely explaining that if the concept of amateurism got wiped away and we could classify how players were employees of businesses, I think there would be plenty of schools with more financial cushion.

there are also many athletic departments, especially those at the smaller levels, that don't make money and require university support. the buy games that schools at the lower levels get from major teams are a huge source of revenue to keep the athletic departments afloat along with the relatively small amount of television money that they get. so criticizing the myriad schools who were (relatively) barely making ends meet before this isn't fair and those schools should be separate from the discussions around say, Wisconsin and Nebraska (two schools that said they're facing $100M projected revenue shortfalls)

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:09 pm**

Obviously its still a net negative, but its also important to mention that people are supposed to hear $100MM revenue shortfall and think $100MM loss.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:17 pm**

yup -- I'm having to make sure I try to say "projected revenue" whenever I mention that

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:23 pm**

Lots of that money gets dumped into the "facilities arms race" on stuff that looks great when players are being recruited, but never have time to use once they are enrolled. Someone also pointed out that lots of money gets thrown into expanding stadium seating capacities when attendance is decreasing.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:25 pm**

Also the coaches of amateurs make obscene money.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:38 pm**

but the free market

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 5:51 pm**

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... not-health

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 5:58 pm**

Speaking of the free market and that previous post, what's to stop someone from trying to create a developmental league to replace the NCAA?

Imagine if some billionaire to wanted to make more money was able to get people like Nick Saban, Dabo Sweeney, Jim Harbaugh, et al interested and they decided to just tell the NCAA to fuck off and decided to start a 12-16 team league with elite four-star/five-star players out of HS. They'd have to commit to stay in this new league for three years (to meet NFL draft eligibility), but they would be making money while they're doing it and the league revenue could be used to purchase insurance policies against injury for all of the players. Not all of the players would pan out but they could always bring players over from the college ranks as well.

Seems like it could be a real money-maker.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 7:15 pm**

brian wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 5:58 pm Speaking of the free market and that previous post, what's to stop someone from trying to create a developmental league to replace the NCAA?

Imagine if some billionaire to wanted to make more money was able to get people like Nick Saban, Dabo Sweeney, Jim Harbaugh, et al interested and they decided to just tell the NCAA to fuck off and decided to start a 12-16 team league with elite four-star/five-star players out of HS. They'd have to commit to stay in this new league for three years (to meet NFL draft eligibility), but they would be making money while they're doing it and the league revenue could be used to purchase insurance policies against injury for all of the players. Not all of the players would pan out but they could always bring players over from the college ranks as well.

Seems like it could be a real money-maker.

Don't know, as soon as it goes Pro you care way less about the teams. A developmental league won't have the attractiveness that "My School" connection. Now if a league can figure out how to make it local, then you may have something. Basically the best up and comers by region or even better. If a college just said f' the NCAA we are treating this minor league team as an investment. Let the team use the name and even the stadium but make no bones about it be a school team.

I mean if the best players went to the G-league instead of NCAA Schools would you care that Zion was playing a year as a Maine Red Claw or focus on the NBA. Guessing not a lot of us followed the Ball kid when he was down under.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 7:43 pm**

I was thinking of having it be a national league, yes. Preserve college football for the fhree-star-ish athletes. Who can still be drafted info NFL of course but have the top 800 or so in a true developmental league.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:16 am**

You're going to end up taking a lot of players who aren't making the NFL and taking them out of college. I don't know how society would view that.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:23 am**

For example, some years are better than others but in 2012:

https://n.rivals.com/prospect_rankings/rivals100/2012

I've heard of maybe half those 5-star guys.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:32 am**

Doesn't that mean you're taking a lot of players who wouldn't get paid to play football and paying them to play football?

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:35 am**

4-star recruit from my alma mater opts out of senior year in hopes of playing at USC this spring.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:52 am**

Gunpowder wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:16 am You're going to end up taking a lot of players who aren't making the NFL and taking them out of college. I don't know how society would view that.

More like taking players who choose that league for higher competition/visibility/development out of college vs choosing education and D2 type football in college. Fair choice to offer I think but would still have to be some mechanism for scholarships in college though. Probably a bigger discussion about college affordability and access. Maybe those guys should have to pay like everyone else?

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:24 am**

Gunpowder wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:16 am You're going to end up taking a lot of players who aren't making the NFL and taking them out of college. I don't know how society would view that.

That's a good point, but important to remember:

-- A lot of these kids aren't really interested in college to begin with and are being shuttled into mostly blowoff classes so they can keep up their GPA. (Not as common as it used to be, but obviously still happens.)

-- They're getting paid for their labor at least, not unlike an 18-year-old kid that opts to join the military for four years instead of going to college.

-- In addition to insurance, there would have to be some mechanisms for free college classes/scholarships both while "employed" by the developmental league (no different than the youth teams in soccer) as well as scholarships/free rides for the kids after their eligibility for the D league is up for those who don't make the NFL and/or don't want to continue playing for whatever reason. At least at that point they can go to more or less whatever university they want and will probably be more interested in actually getting a degree in something that appeals to them.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:54 am**

The G-League has unquestionably better talent than NCAA basketball, but do any of you regularly watch G-League games or own t-shirts of G-League teams? There's just way too much built-in fandom for college football to think you can just replace it with a different league, even if it is potentially better football. It would probably take decades to even begin to get a foothold against college football and its history and rabid fan bases.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:01 am**

The other kind of obvious point is that it costs a shit load of money to stand a football team up from scratch. Basketball, not so much.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:05 am**

As a point of reference - 9 of the 10 biggest football stadiums in the US are for college teams. And 16 of the top 20 (and one of those has no permanent team). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_A ... y_capacity

Displacing college football would be HARD.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:16 am**

To be clear, it's not really an attempt to displace college football, merely to compete with it or augment it (depending on how you want to look at it). If you assume something like 16 teams of about 55-60 players each, that's only a drop in the bucket of the number of players to play college football at even the FBS level. Georgia, Michigan, Notre Dame, et al would still exist albeit with three or so fewer elite players each year perhaps.*

But I'll concede that it would be really, really, really hard to do. I still think it could be a big success though with the right funding and the right partners. Could even play all games on Tuesdays and Wednesdays so as not to compete with the colleges or pros. Put teams in markets not served by NFL teams but still big enough to get media interest.

* If you're asking why anyone would watch, remember some kids would still choose college, of course. Also, some people only watch college football to watch the elite talents but most people are rooting for laundry/alma maters/local teams. I don't think it will actually hurt college football any to remove the players completely disinterested from getting a college education while they're developing for the NFL.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 12:21 pm**

I agree that it won't hurt college, but I think that's the problem with the idea. It has to take some money and viewers from college, or I just don't think it can work. If anything, people are watching and spending less on sports going forward as we have so many other entertainment outlets now (not to mention the increased access to international soccer).

I know that my sons' friends are WAY WAY less into spectator sports than I and my friends were at their age. Most don't pay attention at all.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:09 pm**

brian wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:16 am To be clear, it's not really an attempt to displace college football, merely to compete with it or augment it (depending on how you want to look at it). If you assume something like 16 teams of about 55-60 players each, that's only a drop in the bucket of the number of players to play college football at even the FBS level. Georgia, Michigan, Notre Dame, et al would still exist albeit with three or so fewer elite players each year perhaps.*

But I'll concede that it would be really, really, really hard to do. I still think it could be a big success though with the right funding and the right partners. Could even play all games on Tuesdays and Wednesdays so as not to compete with the colleges or pros. Put teams in markets not served by NFL teams but still big enough to get media interest.

* If you're asking why anyone would watch, remember some kids would still choose college, of course. Also, some people only watch college football to watch the elite talents but most people are rooting for laundry/alma maters/local teams. I don't think it will actually hurt college football any to remove the players completely disinterested from getting a college education while they're developing for the NFL.

There are less than 500 players combined each season that are 4- or 5-stars. So you'd have to get every single one of them and also a matching number of 3-stars.

It would be very hard to do.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:24 pm**

Would it work with an 8 team "conference" where you expect half of the players to be lesser talent because 5 stars won't sign up to sit?

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:25 pm**

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2020 12:21 pm
I know that my sons' friends are WAY WAY less into spectator sports than I and my friends were at their age. Most don't pay attention at all.

I think this is in large part because of multiple TVs in most households these days. My mom and grandma were a big sports fans, and I was into sports anyway, but a lot of the time that's what was on the only TV. Always NFL on sundays, golf was on a lot, I watched a ton of baseball on the superstations, etc. Now, kids go do their own thing.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 7:37 pm**

I’m always amazed at rich people’s appetite to invest in minor league football, but it’s never worked. And junior football is an even tougher investment, because you’re asking your customers to accept that none of the players they are rooting for will stay beyond a couple of years. I really don’t see how you can do it without a ton of built-in goodwill and brand strength, and only colleges and the NFL have that.

I also wouldn’t underestimate how important the free education is as a carrot to get parents to let their kids play a sport that might well shorten their lives by a lot. I think more college football players care about the education than people let on, but for those who don’t, some of them have parents who do.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 7:46 pm**

Also, in this context, “education” entails not just learning but the networking opportunities. If you played college football, even for smaller teams, that opens doors that otherwise would not be open.

Posted: **Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:01 pm**

Rex wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2020 7:37 pm I’m always amazed at rich people’s appetite to invest in minor league football, but it’s never worked.

Kind of semi-related, but I sure wonder about the expertise of that venture capital firm that partnered with The Rock in buying the carcass of the XFL. I'd like to see the business case that supported that decision.

The Swamp

NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020

Re: NCAA Football 2019 --> Offseason --> 2020