I wish the media would hold the powers that be accountable. Seems like everyone's just rolling over as if it's inevitable. They tried to do this in Europe with the super league but I guess Europeans have more of a backbone than we do.
Here comes the doomsday thread, sorry
- Thread starter byebye
- Start date
I wish the media would hold the powers that be accountable. Seems like everyone's just rolling over as if it's inevitable. They tried to do this in Europe with the super league but I guess Europeans have more of a backbone than we do.
The media has conflicts of interest (e.g., ESPN reporting on this while also being a driving force underlying the negotiations all for the sake of Disney's stock price, etc.) that keep them that way.
I think the NFL leadership, especially Roselle, Tagliabue and Goodell, have embraced the need to keep on field competition relatively balanced, and not allow market size or competitive advantage off the field allow domination on the field. While. yes. some teams have dominate eras, the draft, compensatory picks, salary cap, penalties paid to below cap teams; rookie contracts agreed to by the NFLPA, have all been designed to increase on-field competition, thus allowing all teams to be somewhat competitive, Owners are very successful business people and very competitive; yet supported on-field competitive concepts.
Will be interesting to see if the NCAA/P2 can come up with new concepts that take a similar approach to the importance of on-field competition. Usually means giving up some revenue for the long run health of the game, Many past attempts by the NCAA have historically failed, so guess they have another opportunity, hopefully, they look to the NFL for some guidance, would think the networks would be urging that approach.
A chance to get in, yes. But not a chance to win. There's only 1-3 elite teams annually, and who it is any given year rotates between about 15-20 programs.
In "super league", some fanbases that aren't used to losing are going to have to get used to losing
The bigger the playoff the greater the hastening of league imbalance. And, of course, the greater the imbalance of contract negotiation. Which, simply hastens the inevitability of the separation of classes. Gee. Where else are we seeing that?
I’m not disagreeing with you but that is how cfb has always been playoff or not. So really nothing has changed there.
Part of the reason a super league isn’t happening although a minor one.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,745
- 33,768
- 113
He's not wrong, but leading his argument with players rights at the forefront of his "be careful what you wish for" list, is bull ****, as far as I'm concerned. College sports are in the place they are because of greed, first and foremost. It all starts there. Conferences wanting to have all of the benefits of rampant capitalism, with none of the drawbacks that the rest of the world have to deal with.
"People sure have been banging the drum for change, and I don't necessarily disagree, but if you want these 'player rights' don't be surprised when the price of cotton goes up."
He could just as easily have cited the dramatic rise in coach and staff salaries, or the facilities arms race, or any of the realignment waves that have hit in the last 25 years, to make the same point, but I take issue with him putting player rights front and center. They're not to blame when they see the people at the top reap a windfall and ask for something for themselves.
NFL doesn’t give 2 ##### about competitive balance in college sports. We are their “minor leagues” without the costs involved.
Can we cap Big Ten ncaa basketball tourney bids at one or two and ban Purdue? As long as we’re trying to be a meritocracy here.
Maybe there’s some compromise to be made between the P2 and the lesser basketball leagues the same way football P2 is gonna get 2/3 of the playoff bids.
I agree with this, and I'll add that it never will be.
And that is exactly why I HATE the playoff. CFB has zero parity and everyone competing for the same thing is asinine. At ISU being rewarded with a respectable bowl game after a great season was wonderful. Now an amazing season will inevitably end with a playoff loss, and likely a bad one.
It will be almost impossible to have a celebratory end to a great season.
I do think the big 12 Texas schools will always have a shot to rise up and bite, not sure anybody else though…just too much concentrated talent in a highly populated state. In the early 2000s some mountain west teams were legit because they just had this massive part of the country exclusive to themselves (and brilliant coaches) once Colorado and the Az schools fell off…of course those schools minus bsu are in b12 now.
I strongly disagree with this. Even watching my two squads get boat raced in the playoffs it didn’t take away from awesome seasons and big ten titles.
I mean would you really complain if ISU went 11-3 with a Big12 championship and then lost to a SEC team in the playoff? It’s still a conference title, national recognition and a season to celebrate.
No, of course I wouldn't complain about that. But I'd rather be playing in a higher tier 1-off bowl game where there's at least a chance to end the season with a win.
It's a moot point anyway, the bowl system is dead and its demise began with the 4-team playoff.
Yep. The difference is now, making the CFP is the goal/achievement whereas when bowls were less common, then making a bowl was a big deal.
When the Clones went to the Sun Bowl in the 70s, that was considered prestigious and the mark of a great team/season. Nowadays... not so much.
I've said it multiple times but the networks can't afford a P2 for multiple reasons.
The NFL has already shown that they aren't afraid of going up against college football. When push comes to shove the NFL will beat out college 11 times out of 10 for eyeballs. It's just a matter if time before the NFL taps into the Saturday lineup.
I agree with you it’s not likely to happen and I think they realize the safest bet is for them to keep a system where everyone has access. That said, I did find this quote interesting. From a Dennis Dodd article a couple days ago and it basically says the networks have told them a 2 conference breakaway would be successful financially. Here’s the quote:
If NCAA membership doesn't agree to their reforms, the SEC and Big Ten have the leverage to take their 34 teams and stage their own national championship. The networks and the market itself have told them that is possible, and it's a path which SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has already hinted at in the past.
SEC, Big Ten 'advisory group' stands as coded threat to NCAA: Figure it out, or we'll go off ourselves
The power conference may well reshape college athletics in their image
If that happens, then I think the Big 10 and SEC will be doing this:I agree with you it’s not likely to happen and I think they realize the safest bet is for them to keep a system where everyone has access. That said, I did find this quote interesting. From a Dennis Dodd article a couple days ago and it basically says the networks have told them a 2 conference breakaway would be successful financially. Here’s the quote:
If NCAA membership doesn't agree to their reforms, the SEC and Big Ten have the leverage to take their 34 teams and stage their own national championship. The networks and the market itself have told them that is possible, and it's a path which SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has already hinted at in the past.
SEC, Big Ten 'advisory group' stands as coded threat to NCAA: Figure it out, or we'll go off ourselves
The power conference may well reshape college athletics in their imagewww.cbssports.com
