(08-08-2020 09:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I would like to be the first to propose some options regarding topics we can discuss on this board this fall if the entirety of college football is canceled (my father, who attended New Mexico Highlands University in the 1950s, and I are already displeased that NCAA D-II football has been nixed).

So here we go:

Shemp or Curly?

New York or Chicago?

Cincinnati chili or Buffalo hot wings?

Rush or ZZ Top (two "power trios")?

Don Rickles or whoever the hot standup comic is in 2020?

I'll go with Curly
Neither on NY or Chicago. I'll go with Washington DC. Never been there before.
Since I don't care for hit wings, I guess I will go with Cincy chili.
Neither. I love Fleetwood Mac.
There is a stand-up comic I'd like to listen to more-Mark Lowery

Curly... no brainer

If we are talking cities, it’s Chicago. If we are talking pizza style...yep, still Chicago.

Cincy Chilli all the way!

Rush... all day long

George Carlin

(08-09-2020 10:26 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-08-2020 09:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I would like to be the first to propose some options regarding topics we can discuss on this board this fall if the entirety of college football is canceled (my father, who attended New Mexico Highlands University in the 1950s, and I are already displeased that NCAA D-II football has been nixed).

So here we go:

Shemp or Curly?

New York or Chicago?

Cincinnati chili or Buffalo hot wings?

Rush or ZZ Top (two "power trios")?

Don Rickles or whoever the hot standup comic is in 2020?

I'll go with Curly
Neither on NY or Chicago. I'll go with Washington DC. Never been there before.
Since I don't care for hit wings, I guess I will go with Cincy chili.
Neither. I love Fleetwood Mac.
There is a stand-up comic I'd like to listen to more-Mark Lowery

Curly, Need to visit Chicago to make an informed decision,Neither, Rush, but have no issue with ZZ Top, and the 2020 guy, since Rickles is good in short bursts but would not want to hear 60 minutes straight from him.

(08-09-2020 12:00 AM)chester Wrote:  

(08-08-2020 11:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-08-2020 11:20 PM)chester Wrote:  

(08-08-2020 08:33 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-08-2020 08:04 PM)bullet Wrote:  Key word is VERY.

Let them organize. Let them demand half the revenue.

Now, lets look that the reality. The athletic department with the most revenue (Texas) made about 20 million on 224 million in revenue. The most profitable college athletic department made 44 million (A&M) on 212 million in revenue. Only a handful fo schools made any real money---most were close to break even or were actually losing money. Pretty much all the G5 programs are losing money (some quite a bit of meney).

If we take HALF the revenue and give it to the players, every single program goes into the red. Texas would lose about 85 million a year. A&M would lose about
62 million. The funny thing----The G5 would actually be better off than many P5's if they had to give up 50% of their revenues simply because their budgets are so much smaller. Not only are their total budgets half the size of the P5---thier revenues are MUCH less than half the revenues of the P5 (so losing half their revenue would be a MUCH smaller hit to their budgets).

So---what are the chances that every P5 and G5 school will say--yeah--cool, we'll start losing 100 million or more a year on sports to keep the players happy. Zero chance.

Its FAR more likely this brings about a sea change where college sports goes back to the future. They go back to the original TOTALLY PURE AMATEUR MODEL. You play for fun. You play for love of the school. You play for pride and prestige--but you get no compensation. ZERO. No scholarship. No FCOA. You get nothing. That destroys the basis for all the law suits against the FBS schools. As a bonus---it also eliminates a host of Title-9 issues and expenses. It also allows the schools to keep all the revenue and massively CUT expenses.

If the players and lawsuits continue---if they get no relief from Congress---then the schools basically have no choice but to go back to a purely amateur model. They really have no other option. The basic financial realities leave not other way forward for school athletic departments.

No help from Congress? We've talked about the Alston case. Should the plaintiffs win out, the affected schools won't be able to do what you suggest without an antitrust exemption. They can't beat the law by breaking it.

Bottom line, Congress won't kill Title IX. If scholarships are all they offer that will win out. What will be forced is the NFL's agreement to take High School talent, at least in theory. Then there is no anti-trust. The players are free to pay for play, or free to go to school.

Alston deals with the market for the athletic services of FBS football players and D1 basketball players. The NFL's draft rules are not pertinent.

Title IX is whatever it is. Assuming the Alston plaintiffs win out (and they likely will) the affected schools will want to confer with the OCR. In regard to Alston, the courts are not concerned about Title IX. It's irrelevant to the question of the legality of the defendants' violation of antitrust law.

Coog suggests the affected schools can beat Alston by turning to true amateurism. That wouldn't wash because it means a common limit on academic benefits to the plaintiffs after the courts ruled that the defendants can't do that very thing.

EDIT: What I'm trying to say is, if a) the plaintiffs win out and b) the defendants don't get an antitrust exemption then the defendants will not be able to set common limit on education-related benefits to the plaintiff class. They wouldn't be able to cap such benefits at zero and they wouldn't be able to cap them at GIA.

However, any given one of the affected NCAA conferences would be able to set limits on those benefits because none of them alone have monopsony power. They'd all better hope, though, that if they do secretly collude to set a common limit, like at zero or at GIA, that they're not then found out. That would lead to multimillion dollar fines and/or prison time for the decision makers.

The NCAA basically won Alston. It doesn't allow for paying players. It was about the best result they could hope for. The only thing they lost they already understood, on the likenesses. The problem is that they haven't come up with any rules in the 3 years they have been talking about it and states are looking at 50 different laws regulating it.