I'm sure some of y'all have read this. I'm about a 1/4 of the way into it. Interesting so far. Oh, and this is the updated version that includes all the extra info on the Fiesta Bowl. That is the chapter I'm on right now.

There was a nice piece in there about FAU going to Detroit a few years ago and all of the things they tried to do to cut costs.

Great book, except at a certain point it gets repetitive, but that's because they have so much material to back up their position.
Every American taxpayer should read this thing to see how tens of millions of public dollars are funneled through colleges to bowl commissioners every year.
And what's infuriating is that the 16 team playoff format they've developed with the help of AD's, TV executives and economists would produce a huge flow of money back into the universities, but the conference commissioners, bowl execs and some AD's block it because it would cut off their gravy train.

The important things to remember are that the presidents have lost control of athletics and that keeping fans happy is just one small group to keep happy. They have to deal with their board (often the state as well), the faculty and the students and lots and lots of alums who don't care about athletics.

There is no incentive for them to take even more heat from those groups by injecting more money into the system, more pressure for success, while at the same time making it even more clear how commercial athletics have become.

Until there is some way for the presidents to gain control of athletics and funnel a significant portion of the revenues that come in at elite programs to the budgets the president has actual control of, a playoff is a non-starter.

I don't think the presidents and commissioners are as enamored with the bowls as Wetzel believes. I think the relationship is pragmatic rather than a love affair. The bowls provide some services, they generally produce about half the crowd at most games and handle all the site logistics and they guarantee a set number of dollars and take the financial risks.

Now I think in most cases it could be effectively argued that history has shown the overall financial risk is not that great, but colleges historically outsource their risk. Look at the TV deals. No conference has ever taken on any significant amount of risk. The Big 10 has Fox as a 49% partner and Fox took on the bulk of the risk, the Big 10's risk exposure was in not generating as many dollars as a conventional package might bring. The Pac-12 deal is structured in a similar manner. The TV nets are carrying the bulk of the risk. They offer a guaranteed dollar amount that they believe they can pay and still make a good profit (remember ESPN is the most profitable division of Disney by most accounts and is a major cash cow). The risk of whether the ad and subscriber dollars are there is borne by the TV people.

The BCS starts with a cash payment from each bowl (I've heard north of $5 million and south of $10 million per year). Then the TV part enters the equation. If ESPN went bankrupt and defaulted on the BCS deal and there was no TV money and no tickets were sold, the BCS is break-even deal for the schools because of the bowl payments.

If the schools would break their usual mold and assume the risk they could do a wildly profitable playoff system... but it is going to require early rounds at campus sites and that's not as much fun as a week at a bowl site and its less appealing for courting donors. It seems "unfair" in the college mindset because neutral site has become so common. It is also going to seem like they are injecting fat cash for the benefit of coaches at a time when students are asked to pay more and faculty gets a shrinking a take home pay because there are no raises but insurance premiums are rising.

(01-17-2012 03:52 PM)AtlantaJag Wrote:  Great book, except at a certain point it gets repetitive, but that's because they have so much material to back up their position.
Every American taxpayer should read this thing to see how tens of millions of public dollars are funneled through colleges to bowl commissioners every year.
And what's infuriating is that the 16 team playoff format they've developed with the help of AD's, TV executives and economists would produce a huge flow of money back into the universities, but the conference commissioners, bowl execs and some AD's block it because it would cut off their gravy train.

It will be a long time before we see a 16 team playoff. It may happen eventually, but Mark Emmert has even said he supports a 4 team playoff, but doesn't support it growing from that number.

Anyone who knows the history of March Madness knows that a football playoff would likely grow over time, but I expect it would take quite some time to get to 16.

One of the Atlanta area talk show hosts has been championing a 6 team format with the #1 and #2 teams getting a first round bye, to reward the two best teams in the country who would have been playing for the championship under the old system.

It is definitely getting repetitive. The only thing that seems to change is which bowl director, how much was spent, and where. I'll probably finish it tonight or tomorrow night though. I recommend everyone here read it. Just for the in depth knowledge on how the bowl system works behind the scenes. There was a long section on fans buying really cheap tickets through outside sources instead of through the school. I know it was brought up on the Troy message board the last time the Trojans played in New Orleans on how important it was to buy them through the Athletics Department.

(01-18-2012 03:09 PM)RDA Trojan Wrote:  It is definitely getting repetitive. The only thing that seems to change is which bowl director, how much was spent, and where. I'll probably finish it tonight or tomorrow night though. I recommend everyone here read it. Just for the in depth knowledge on how the bowl system works behind the scenes. There was a long section on fans buying really cheap tickets through outside sources instead of through the school. I know it was brought up on the Troy message board the last time the Trojans played in New Orleans on how important it was to buy them through the Athletics Department.

As Cajuns fans we were well informed of the need to buy through the school----We did this and it worked out great!!! Can't wait to see the final outcome of the money!!!

The chapter that talked about Michigan having trouble finding a non-con opening opponent before finally getting UConn was great. It was the one that ended with the 5 proposed brackets for the 2006-2010 seasons. Nice to see Troy in there 3 times as conference champ. The part I laughed at was that it had us playing Ohio State one year, Florida another, and Alabama in another. One of these things is not like the other. At least we've played 2 of those in the regular season before.

Hey, we were pretty good in 2009. A missed FG away from a 10 win season. And I know they meant Arkansas, but it is funnier to me that they said Alabama.

You should also check out The Cartel, it's only on kindle right now I believe, but it's only $3. It targets the NCAA as a whole and the fraud of its amateurism claims.

The biggest problem with a playoff is money. Right now ESPN pays the bowls directly and that money goes to the schools directly. A play off would wind up like March Madness with the NCAA running the play off, signing TV deals, collectingt the money, and doling out payouts based on a credit system. The big money schools hate that because it actually spreads the wealth based on success not on luck of the draw.

When the NCAA amended the constitution some years back, a provision was inserted that provided that if there is an FBS playoff that the money is not subject to the regular NCAA revenue sharing model.

I tend to believe that we will eventually have a large playoff (ie. 12 or more teams) but it will grow out of the BCS and be administered by the BCS.

I think that what happens down the road with the big playoff or even if there is a break-away formed that the structure will be a C corp, LLC, LLP, or co-op. A formula will be created to assess the amount of equity each conference brings to the table.

For example. Let's say there are 9 FBS conferences standing at this point. ACC, SEC, Big 10, Pac-10, Big 12, and Notre Dame would represent roughly 80-90% of the value of the organization. The organization could have 100 or 1000 shares. Then 85% (850 shares of 1000) would be divided among them. That would be around 13 shares per school (shares probably held by the conference).

The Sun Belt, MAC, Alliance, and Big East would represent 15% of the value and it would work out to about 2.5 shares per school (again shares probably held by the conference).

You agree going in that a set percentage of revenue goes to overhead (small percentage if a BCS type organization, larger if an NCAA replacement). Another percentage is dedicated to distribution as dividends and a percentage dedicated to be distributed based upon performance (in the football playoff and basketball tournament if an NCAA replacement).

If other schools want to join the group, they have two choices. Meet whatever membership standards and join but not have a stake in the shareholder distribution, they would only be eligible for performance payments. The second option would be to pay shares to gain membership.

If shares are held by individual schools that could get interesting. A school like Maryland that is battling fiscal crisis might choose to reduce their holding from 13 share to 10 shares, auctioning off those three shares. DePaul, Marquette, and Georgetown might work jointly to buy the shares and get real membership or Michigan looking long-term might run up the bid to get a bigger stake and the long-term earnings of the organization.

The current idea that any new member walks in and has an immediate equitable stake equal to others would go away and instead move to an environment where distributions better reflect what everyone is bringing to the table.

(01-21-2012 11:30 AM)LR Eagle Wrote:  You should also check out The Cartel, it's only on kindle right now I believe, but it's only $3. It targets the NCAA as a whole and the fraud of its amateurism claims.

I do all my reading on my Kindle now anyways. Thanks for the suggestion, I'll check it out tonight when I get home.