So you think the upper tier cares about the lower. At some point there will be 32-40 teams in the P5. Of course they will have to realign as independent units because of contractual obligations to the lesser teams within the conferences they cannot simply toss them.

In other words NFL lite.

(05-02-2015 09:12 AM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 12:24 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  name another sports league that divides league revenue using the logic you've outlined. There isn't one. Besides, revenue is split at a conference level, not a team level, so by your own example how can you justify Wake Forrest "earning" 4X Boise State? Its unjustifiable.

If your logic is valid then why don't conferences split revenue amongst their teams the same way? Why does Northwestern get the same B1G revenue as Ohio State? Is that fair? Did NW "earn" as much as OSU? Or how about the revenue from NCAA Tournament appearances? Every B1G team receives an equal amount even though Michigan State has earned more than any other team and Northwestern has NEVER made an NCAA Tournament appearance and thus has earned nothing. So why split it evenly?

Last year the NFL earned over $6Billion in league TV revenue and they split it evenly amongst the 32 teams, $187.7M each. Why? Didn't the Dallas Cowboys "earn" more than the Cincinnati Bengals? And why do AFC teams, which come from the old AFL, earn as much as NFC teams, which are from the original NFL. Shouldn't the AFC teams just be thankful the NFC teams allowed them to join their league? Shouldn't they be forever indebted? Shouldn't the revenue distribution reflect who deserves it more?

Using the FBS model of a 70/27 split, why doesn't the NFL give the NFC teams $262M and the AFC $101M? Isn't that the fair thing to do? Aren't your bells going off at the sight of these freeloading AFL teams getting more than they deserve? Why aren't you outraged that every professional sports league in America has an equitable revenue distribution plan and NONE of them perpetuate eternal wealth and eternal poverty based on some BS notion of worth and value?

And spare me your "life's unfair" routine. Please, stop swallowing the talking points of rich people who want you to support a corrupt system that benefits them but not you. This is league revenue were talking about, it should benefit the entire league. Individual teams are rewarded for their success by individual revenue streams- ticket sales, merchandising, donations, etc. Nobody is suggesting those dollars be redistributed.

I view each conference as a league and each has the right to split their revenue the way they see fit. If that means an equal share for each team in the league, then so be it. I'd also have no problem with any of them awarding $$$ to the teams who performed best against OOC opponents with the highest RPI's and then placed highest in the league's final rankings. But it's their money, they earned it, and they get to decide how they divi it up.

Alternately we could go to a form of the system you propose, split everything equally, give gold stars to everyone, and don't bother to tote wins and losses. Don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.

Step away from talk radio for a minute and use your brain. Name ONE sports league that splits league revenue like this. ONE. Name one conference that does it like this. NOBODY splits revenue amongst equal members in a 70/27 split. The NFL splits league revenue equally amongst its members, do you think the NFL is a gold star league that doesn't care about wins and losses? do you? are you even listening to your own rhetoric? you make no sense.

And you think its all done in the name of 'Merica and "fairness"?? You can't be serious.

(05-02-2015 01:48 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Step away from talk radio for a minute and use your brain. Name ONE sports league that splits league revenue like this. ONE. Name one conference that does it like this. NOBODY splits revenue amongst equal members in a 70/27 split. The NFL splits league revenue equally amongst its members, do you think the NFL is a gold star league that doesn't care about wins and losses? do you? are you even listening to your own rhetoric? you make no sense.

And you think its all done in the name of 'Merica and "fairness"?? You can't be serious.

Would you do me a huge favor? When the draft is over, please provide a total of P5 players drafted versus everyone else. Afterwards, we'll talk.

(05-02-2015 02:38 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 01:48 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Step away from talk radio for a minute and use your brain. Name ONE sports league that splits league revenue like this. ONE. Name one conference that does it like this. NOBODY splits revenue amongst equal members in a 70/27 split. The NFL splits league revenue equally amongst its members, do you think the NFL is a gold star league that doesn't care about wins and losses? do you? are you even listening to your own rhetoric? you make no sense.

And you think its all done in the name of 'Merica and "fairness"?? You can't be serious.

Would you do me a huge favor? When the draft is over, please provide a total of P5 players drafted versus everyone else. Afterwards, we'll talk.

lmao- you think that listing all of the players drafted from teams that receive 70% of the league revenue will prove your point? It proves MY point.

(05-02-2015 03:22 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 02:38 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 01:48 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Step away from talk radio for a minute and use your brain. Name ONE sports league that splits league revenue like this. ONE. Name one conference that does it like this. NOBODY splits revenue amongst equal members in a 70/27 split. The NFL splits league revenue equally amongst its members, do you think the NFL is a gold star league that doesn't care about wins and losses? do you? are you even listening to your own rhetoric? you make no sense.

And you think its all done in the name of 'Merica and "fairness"?? You can't be serious.

Would you do me a huge favor? When the draft is over, please provide a total of P5 players drafted versus everyone else. Afterwards, we'll talk.

lmao- you think that listing all of the players drafted from teams that receive 70% of the league revenue will prove your point? It proves MY point.

I didn't ask for a listing all of the players drafted, I asked for a total from the P5's versus the G5's. I bet it'll prove my point, that we're all in the same league in name only.

(05-02-2015 06:14 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 03:22 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 02:38 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 01:48 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  Step away from talk radio for a minute and use your brain. Name ONE sports league that splits league revenue like this. ONE. Name one conference that does it like this. NOBODY splits revenue amongst equal members in a 70/27 split. The NFL splits league revenue equally amongst its members, do you think the NFL is a gold star league that doesn't care about wins and losses? do you? are you even listening to your own rhetoric? you make no sense.

And you think its all done in the name of 'Merica and "fairness"?? You can't be serious.

Would you do me a huge favor? When the draft is over, please provide a total of P5 players drafted versus everyone else. Afterwards, we'll talk.

lmao- you think that listing all of the players drafted from teams that receive 70% of the league revenue will prove your point? It proves MY point.

I didn't ask for a listing all of the players drafted, I asked for a total from the P5's versus the G5's. I bet it'll prove my point, that we're all in the same league in name only.

you still don't get it. when the league share its rev 70/27 OF COURSE the teams that get 70% of the revenue are going to have more players drafted than the teams that only get 27% OF COURSE. That's the whole point. How can you possibly be so naive as to to not understand that?

(05-02-2015 06:20 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  you still don't get it. when the league share its rev 70/27 OF COURSE the teams that get 70% of the revenue are going to have more players drafted than the teams that only get 27% OF COURSE. That's the whole point. How can you possibly be so naive as to to not understand that?

But the players aren't drafted, they choose where they wish to play.

PP, I understand how unfair it all seems. And I've seen your arguments posted by a dozen other idealists on other sites. You may choose this hill to die on, but don't count me to be in the foxhole next you.

The separation we saw before is now only going to get larger and there's nothing anyone is going to do about it. Tilt at those windmills man.

Breakdown by conference (from Sporting News)

SEC: 54
ACC: 47
Pac-12: 39
Big Ten: 35
Big 12: 25
American Athletic Conference: 11
Mountain West Conference: 10
Conference USA: 6
Mid-American Conference: 4
Missouri Valley Conference: 4
Colonial Athletic Association: 3
Sun Belt Conference: 3
Independent: 2
Ohio Valley Conference: 2
South Atlantic Conference: 2
Southern Conference: 2
Southland Conference: 2
Big Sky Conference: 1
Big South Conference: 1
Liberty League: 1
Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference: 1
Southwestern Athletic Conference: 1

So, in a nutshell, the NFL selected FBS players for their draft at a rate of 86 to 14% in favor of the P5's.

The top three G5 conferences exceed the lowest P5 conference by two draft picks. The P5 have two hundred picks of the 224 regulation draft picks. And none of that has anything to do with revenue.

The members of the power leagues have built up a huge interest over the decades, and gradually have monopolized all media outlets. That is the source of the revenue. More revenue will not make it any more or less likely that an athlete will sign with a non P5 team.

The separation issue aside from an unfair monopoly take over is far too complex to say it is this or that. It would take a white page investigative report to gather enough information to come up with the whys and why nots. To say follow the money is simply a simplistic way to tally the net results.

(05-03-2015 09:32 AM)CajunExpress Wrote:  The top three G5 conferences exceed the lowest P5 conference by two draft picks. The P5 have two hundred picks of the 224 regulation draft picks. And none of that has anything to do with revenue.

The members of the power leagues have built up a huge interest over the decades, and gradually have monopolized all media outlets. That is the source of the revenue. More revenue will not make it any more or less likely that an athlete will sign with a non P5 team.

The separation issue aside from an unfair monopoly take over is far too complex to say it is this or that. It would take a white page investigative report to gather enough information to come up with the whys and why nots. To say follow the money is simply a simplistic way to tally the net results.

I agree with most of your comments with the exception of the revenue part bolded above. More revenue means better facilities and better facilities means better coaches and players. I think of the comment of Coach Hud when he visited the Cajun athletic facilites and was shocked with what he found.....a program with facilities right out of the 1970's. He almost turned down the job because of it. I'm sure a certain number of athletes have gone elsewhere because of what we had versus the next guy who at least had upgraded his facilities over the years.

It appears to me that Perimeterpost is trying to make an apples to apples comparison of the NFL to FBS football. My argument would be that FBS football is a unique fruit.....a money making operation, yes, yet one built on players who technically don't get paid (at least not until now). It's now grown to be such a convoluted and twisted structure that is almost impossible to unravel.

As for your comments about the P5's monolopizing the media, I view that issue from more of a quality-of-product and dollars-and-cents standpoint. The P5's have those huge TV deals because they generally put a better product on the field, one with greater demand from the viewing audience and one with sponors willing to pay big money for commercials.

Let's face it, when it comes down to viewing Idaho taking on the UNTs versus Auburn at Alabama or Florida State versus Florida, who's going to have the most viewers?

(05-03-2015 11:44 AM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 09:32 AM)CajunExpress Wrote:  The top three G5 conferences exceed the lowest P5 conference by two draft picks. The P5 have two hundred picks of the 224 regulation draft picks. And none of that has anything to do with revenue.

The members of the power leagues have built up a huge interest over the decades, and gradually have monopolized all media outlets. That is the source of the revenue. More revenue will not make it any more or less likely that an athlete will sign with a non P5 team.

The separation issue aside from an unfair monopoly take over is far too complex to say it is this or that. It would take a white page investigative report to gather enough information to come up with the whys and why nots. To say follow the money is simply a simplistic way to tally the net results.

I agree with most of your comments with the exception of the revenue part bolded above. More revenue means better facilities and better facilities means better coaches and players. I think of the comment of Coach Hud when he visited the Cajun athletic facilites and was shocked with what he found.....a program with facilities right out of the 1970's. He almost turned down the job because of it. I'm sure a certain number of athletes have gone elsewhere because of what we had versus the next guy who at least had upgraded his facilities over the years.

It appears to me that Perimeterpost is trying to make an apples to apples comparison of the NFL to FBS football. My argument would be that FBS football is a unique fruit.....a money making operation, yes, yet one built on players who technically don't get paid (at least not until now). It's now grown to be such a convoluted and twisted structure that is almost impossible to unravel.

As for your comments about the P5's monolopizing the media, I view that issue from more of a quality-of-product and dollars-and-cents standpoint. The P5's have those huge TV deals because they generally put a better product on the field, one with greater demand from the viewing audience and one with sponors willing to pay big money for commercials.

Let's face it, when it comes down to viewing Idaho taking on the UNTs versus Auburn at Alabama or Florida State versus Florida, who's going to have the most viewers?

Saying a cartel produces better results therefore it isn't a cartel because it produces better results isn't really convincing me.

(05-03-2015 11:44 AM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 09:32 AM)CajunExpress Wrote:  The top three G5 conferences exceed the lowest P5 conference by two draft picks. The P5 have two hundred picks of the 224 regulation draft picks. And none of that has anything to do with revenue.

The members of the power leagues have built up a huge interest over the decades, and gradually have monopolized all media outlets. That is the source of the revenue. More revenue will not make it any more or less likely that an athlete will sign with a non P5 team.

The separation issue aside from an unfair monopoly take over is far too complex to say it is this or that. It would take a white page investigative report to gather enough information to come up with the whys and why nots. To say follow the money is simply a simplistic way to tally the net results.

I agree with most of your comments with the exception of the revenue part bolded above. More revenue means better facilities and better facilities means better coaches and players. I think of the comment of Coach Hud when he visited the Cajun athletic facilites and was shocked with what he found.....a program with facilities right out of the 1970's. He almost turned down the job because of it. I'm sure a certain number of athletes have gone elsewhere because of what we had versus the next guy who at least had upgraded his facilities over the years.

It appears to me that Perimeterpost is trying to make an apples to apples comparison of the NFL to FBS football. My argument would be that FBS football is a unique fruit.....a money making operation, yes, yet one built on players who technically don't get paid (at least not until now). It's now grown to be such a convoluted and twisted structure that is almost impossible to unravel.

As for your comments about the P5's monolopizing the media, I view that issue from more of a quality-of-product and dollars-and-cents standpoint. The P5's have those huge TV deals because they generally put a better product on the field, one with greater demand from the viewing audience and one with sponors willing to pay big money for commercials.

Let's face it, when it comes down to viewing Idaho taking on the UNTs versus Auburn at Alabama or Florida State versus Florida, who's going to have the most viewers?

Just a couple of things. I am not saying infrastructure is without meaning, I am saying that we are not getting an LSU player even if our infrastructure were equal to or better.

You really have to go back to the post WWII years to fully comprehend how the money followed TV, and TV followed the established powers, and that is all you need.

(05-03-2015 11:51 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 11:44 AM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 09:32 AM)CajunExpress Wrote:  The top three G5 conferences exceed the lowest P5 conference by two draft picks. The P5 have two hundred picks of the 224 regulation draft picks. And none of that has anything to do with revenue.

The members of the power leagues have built up a huge interest over the decades, and gradually have monopolized all media outlets. That is the source of the revenue. More revenue will not make it any more or less likely that an athlete will sign with a non P5 team.

The separation issue aside from an unfair monopoly take over is far too complex to say it is this or that. It would take a white page investigative report to gather enough information to come up with the whys and why nots. To say follow the money is simply a simplistic way to tally the net results.

I agree with most of your comments with the exception of the revenue part bolded above. More revenue means better facilities and better facilities means better coaches and players. I think of the comment of Coach Hud when he visited the Cajun athletic facilites and was shocked with what he found.....a program with facilities right out of the 1970's. He almost turned down the job because of it. I'm sure a certain number of athletes have gone elsewhere because of what we had versus the next guy who at least had upgraded his facilities over the years.

It appears to me that Perimeterpost is trying to make an apples to apples comparison of the NFL to FBS football. My argument would be that FBS football is a unique fruit.....a money making operation, yes, yet one built on players who technically don't get paid (at least not until now). It's now grown to be such a convoluted and twisted structure that is almost impossible to unravel.

As for your comments about the P5's monolopizing the media, I view that issue from more of a quality-of-product and dollars-and-cents standpoint. The P5's have those huge TV deals because they generally put a better product on the field, one with greater demand from the viewing audience and one with sponors willing to pay big money for commercials.

Let's face it, when it comes down to viewing Idaho taking on the UNTs versus Auburn at Alabama or Florida State versus Florida, who's going to have the most viewers?

Saying a cartel produces better results therefore it isn't a cartel because it produces better results isn't really convincing me.

Did I say all that or are you pulling a BRTransgender on me?

(05-03-2015 11:59 AM)CajunExpress Wrote:  Just a couple of things. I am not saying infrastructure is without meaning, I am saying that we are not getting an LSU player even if our infrastructure were equal to or better.

Understood and agree, though if he was dressing out in a locker room with waterfalls and belly dancers and then running out on to Cajun Field to play in front of 90,000 fans and a national television audience, we might have a shot at him.

(05-03-2015 12:08 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 11:51 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 11:44 AM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 09:32 AM)CajunExpress Wrote:  The top three G5 conferences exceed the lowest P5 conference by two draft picks. The P5 have two hundred picks of the 224 regulation draft picks. And none of that has anything to do with revenue.

The members of the power leagues have built up a huge interest over the decades, and gradually have monopolized all media outlets. That is the source of the revenue. More revenue will not make it any more or less likely that an athlete will sign with a non P5 team.

The separation issue aside from an unfair monopoly take over is far too complex to say it is this or that. It would take a white page investigative report to gather enough information to come up with the whys and why nots. To say follow the money is simply a simplistic way to tally the net results.

I agree with most of your comments with the exception of the revenue part bolded above. More revenue means better facilities and better facilities means better coaches and players. I think of the comment of Coach Hud when he visited the Cajun athletic facilites and was shocked with what he found.....a program with facilities right out of the 1970's. He almost turned down the job because of it. I'm sure a certain number of athletes have gone elsewhere because of what we had versus the next guy who at least had upgraded his facilities over the years.

It appears to me that Perimeterpost is trying to make an apples to apples comparison of the NFL to FBS football. My argument would be that FBS football is a unique fruit.....a money making operation, yes, yet one built on players who technically don't get paid (at least not until now). It's now grown to be such a convoluted and twisted structure that is almost impossible to unravel.

As for your comments about the P5's monolopizing the media, I view that issue from more of a quality-of-product and dollars-and-cents standpoint. The P5's have those huge TV deals because they generally put a better product on the field, one with greater demand from the viewing audience and one with sponors willing to pay big money for commercials.

Let's face it, when it comes down to viewing Idaho taking on the UNTs versus Auburn at Alabama or Florida State versus Florida, who's going to have the most viewers?

Saying a cartel produces better results therefore it isn't a cartel because it produces better results isn't really convincing me.

Did I say all that or are you pulling a BRTransgender on me?

I was more taking issue with you seeming to let them off the hook on tv deals because of the "quality product" and "greater demand from the viewing audience". Both of those things are still rooted in the cartel behavior and so their ability to monopolize the media originally sprung from that behavior...and gets worse because of that behavior.

(05-03-2015 02:43 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  I was more taking issue with you seeming to let them off the hook on tv deals because of the "quality product" and "greater demand from the viewing audience". Both of those things are still rooted in the cartel behavior and so their ability to monopolize the media originally sprung from that behavior...and gets worse because of that behavior.

Perhaps so. But television is in it for the money and the history of viewing audiences and sponsors don't lie. No matter how it's sliced, it's typically more entertaining to watch top-quality athletes go at one another tan a bunch of lower tier players. And I say that, of course, as a die-hard Cajun fan.

I think we'll get a good idea of what TV thinks of our product with the next round of contracts. I'm thinking C-USA in particular will be in for a shock.

(05-03-2015 07:32 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 02:43 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  I was more taking issue with you seeming to let them off the hook on tv deals because of the "quality product" and "greater demand from the viewing audience". Both of those things are still rooted in the cartel behavior and so their ability to monopolize the media originally sprung from that behavior...and gets worse because of that behavior.

Perhaps so. But television is in it for the money and the history of viewing audiences and sponsors don't lie. No matter how it's sliced, it's typically more entertaining to watch top-quality athletes go at one another tan a bunch of lower tier players. And I say that, of course, as a die-hard Cajun fan.

I think we'll get a good idea of what TV thinks of our product with the next round of contracts. I'm thinking C-USA in particular will be in for a shock.

If you're right and CUSA's new TV contract is shockingly bad, then the SBC will have no hope of ever getting a decent TV contract either. I'm hoping that you're wrong and that CUSA's new contract is about the same as it is now, and that you guys get a much better deal whenever the SBC negotiates a new TV contract.

Without some outside-the-box ideas like CajunExpress has suggested, I don't see TV deals getting much better for any of us below the P5's. You yourself have lectured us on what's coming and while I absolutely hate agreeing with you on anything, I'm afraid you're right.

(05-03-2015 09:17 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  Without some outside-the-box ideas like CajunExpress has suggested, I don't see TV deals getting much better for any of us below the P5's. You yourself have lectured us on what's coming and while I absolutely hate agreeing with you on anything, I'm afraid you're right.

Okay, it was CrazyCajun's outside-the-box ideas I liked. Here's a quote:

(05-01-2015 02:59 PM)CrazyCajun Wrote:  The P5 already has separation from the G5, deregulation is not going to hurt us any more at this point. What many people are assuming is it will mean more conference realignment in the traditional or historical way. I think that assumption is shortsighted because once deregulation happens and I think it will eventually, you could see a push from the top of the G5 to separate from the bottom and create another buffer between the top and bottom of FBS Football.

Remember this, eventually the P5 will move to stop all scheduling of programs that are not in the Top 60 RPI. This will make it difficult for G5 members to schedule games with the top members of the P5. Under deregulation, building a coalition of the Top G5 programs for scheduling purposes would be allowed. That may be our future or fight in the near future to remain somewhat relevant in FBS Football.

(05-03-2015 09:40 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 09:17 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  Without some outside-the-box ideas like CajunExpress has suggested, I don't see TV deals getting much better for any of us below the P5's. You yourself have lectured us on what's coming and while I absolutely hate agreeing with you on anything, I'm afraid you're right.

Okay, it was CrazyCajun's outside-the-box ideas I liked. Here's a quote:

(05-01-2015 02:59 PM)CrazyCajun Wrote:  The P5 already has separation from the G5, deregulation is not going to hurt us any more at this point. What many people are assuming is it will mean more conference realignment in the traditional or historical way. I think that assumption is shortsighted because once deregulation happens and I think it will eventually, you could see a push from the top of the G5 to separate from the bottom and create another buffer between the top and bottom of FBS Football.

Remember this, eventually the P5 will move to stop all scheduling of programs that are not in the Top 60 RPI. This will make it difficult for G5 members to schedule games with the top members of the P5. Under deregulation, building a coalition of the Top G5 programs for scheduling purposes would be allowed. That may be our future or fight in the near future to remain somewhat relevant in FBS Football.

I do look for some kind of alliance to be formed between the AAC and the MWC. Maybe a scheduling alliance to try to separate themselves from the rest of us in the G5. They may even have a championship game between their conference champs to try to lock in the access bowl spot for themselves each year.