converrl
All American
Posts: 4,915
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 50
I Root For:
Location:
|
RE: All AAC teams
(12-05-2019 05:03 PM)BearcatMan Wrote: (12-05-2019 03:11 PM)converrl Wrote: (12-05-2019 09:10 AM)BearcatMan Wrote: (12-05-2019 08:41 AM)converrl Wrote: Can any of these guys play basketball?
Can we keep a separation of Church and State here...
Both are revenue sports...it should be something examined at every opportunity. No reason to have eligibility wasted on only one sport if you can play 2. Helps both ventures.
Rod Monroe was NFL and he played hoops for us
Connor Barwin played forward
Didn't Peek play both?
Didn't Jackson play both?
More able bodies are always needed.
I'm more referring to this being a conversation about football and football player performance that basketball doesn't need to be interjected into just because someone refuses to recognize the sport and it's value to the school.
NEVER said it wasn't a value to the school...it's a revenue sport...DID say that the spending should be tracked to realistic expectations. A P5 should spend like a P5, everyone else needs to think long and hard before investing P5 level $$$ in the hopes of a NC...won't ever happen.
MBB is totally different...make the field of 64 and you have a theoretical chance of winning and a significant chance of going to the championship game. Much better ROI with lower expenditures.
(This post was last modified: 12-06-2019 06:23 AM by converrl.)
|
|
12-05-2019 11:20 PM |
|
natibeast21
Banned
Posts: 2,481
Joined: Nov 2010
I Root For: UC, Ohio State
Location: Independent Thought
|
RE: All AAC teams
(12-05-2019 11:20 PM)converrl Wrote: (12-05-2019 05:03 PM)BearcatMan Wrote: (12-05-2019 03:11 PM)converrl Wrote: (12-05-2019 09:10 AM)BearcatMan Wrote: (12-05-2019 08:41 AM)converrl Wrote: Can any of these guys play basketball?
Can we keep a separation of Church and State here...
Both are revenue sports...it should be something examined at every opportunity. No reason to have eligibility wasted on only one sport if you can play 2. Helps both ventures.
Rod Monroe was NFL and he played hoops for us
Connor Barwin played forward
Didn't Peek play both?
Didn't Jackson play both?
More able bodies are always needed.
I'm more referring to this being a conversation about football and football player performance that basketball doesn't need to be interjected into just because someone refuses to recognize the sport and it's value to the school.
NEVER said it wasn't a value to the school...it's a revenue sport...DID say that the spending should be tracked to realistic expectations. A P5 should spoend like a P5, everyone else needs to think long and hard before investing P5 level $$$ in the hopes of a NC...won't ever happen.
MBB is totally different...make the field of 64 and you have a theoretical chance of winning and a significant chance of going to the championship game. Much better ROI with lower expenditures.
I don’t think any so called G5 school is investing with thoughts of winning national championship in football. Hell I’d garner to say about 50% of the P5 schools invest knowing they’ll never touch or even get a taste at a chance for a national championship.
Top 2 reasons to invest in football just off the top of head zero research or data for this, but my argument would be:
1) To be positioned well if/when next realignment occurs
2) The UCFs, Boise’s etc. added an additional brand image that the University represents that trickles down to all other athletic sports and even into students deciding where to attend.
|
|
12-05-2019 11:29 PM |
|
converrl
All American
Posts: 4,915
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 50
I Root For:
Location:
|
RE: All AAC teams
(12-05-2019 11:29 PM)natibeast21 Wrote: (12-05-2019 11:20 PM)converrl Wrote: (12-05-2019 05:03 PM)BearcatMan Wrote: (12-05-2019 03:11 PM)converrl Wrote: (12-05-2019 09:10 AM)BearcatMan Wrote: Can we keep a separation of Church and State here...
Both are revenue sports...it should be something examined at every opportunity. No reason to have eligibility wasted on only one sport if you can play 2. Helps both ventures.
Rod Monroe was NFL and he played hoops for us
Connor Barwin played forward
Didn't Peek play both?
Didn't Jackson play both?
More able bodies are always needed.
I'm more referring to this being a conversation about football and football player performance that basketball doesn't need to be interjected into just because someone refuses to recognize the sport and it's value to the school.
NEVER said it wasn't a value to the school...it's a revenue sport...DID say that the spending should be tracked to realistic expectations. A P5 should spoend like a P5, everyone else needs to think long and hard before investing P5 level $$$ in the hopes of a NC...won't ever happen.
MBB is totally different...make the field of 64 and you have a theoretical chance of winning and a significant chance of going to the championship game. Much better ROI with lower expenditures.
I don’t think any so called G5 school is investing with thoughts of winning national championship in football. Hell I’d garner to say about 50% of the P5 schools invest knowing they’ll never touch or even get a taste at a chance for a national championship.
Top 2 reasons to invest in football just off the top of head zero research or data for this, but my argument would be:
1) To be positioned well if/when next realignment occurs
2) The UCFs, Boise’s etc. added an additional brand image that the University represents that trickles down to all other athletic sports and even into students deciding where to attend.
I'd propose a subsidy cutoff point...how about...don't let the subsidy get above 50% if you are not a P5?
|
|
12-06-2019 06:24 AM |
|
BearcatMan
Kicking Connoisseur/Occasional Man Crush
Posts: 24,245
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 590
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
|
RE: All AAC teams
(12-06-2019 06:24 AM)converrl Wrote: (12-05-2019 11:29 PM)natibeast21 Wrote: (12-05-2019 11:20 PM)converrl Wrote: (12-05-2019 05:03 PM)BearcatMan Wrote: (12-05-2019 03:11 PM)converrl Wrote: Both are revenue sports...it should be something examined at every opportunity. No reason to have eligibility wasted on only one sport if you can play 2. Helps both ventures.
Rod Monroe was NFL and he played hoops for us
Connor Barwin played forward
Didn't Peek play both?
Didn't Jackson play both?
More able bodies are always needed.
I'm more referring to this being a conversation about football and football player performance that basketball doesn't need to be interjected into just because someone refuses to recognize the sport and it's value to the school.
NEVER said it wasn't a value to the school...it's a revenue sport...DID say that the spending should be tracked to realistic expectations. A P5 should spoend like a P5, everyone else needs to think long and hard before investing P5 level $$$ in the hopes of a NC...won't ever happen.
MBB is totally different...make the field of 64 and you have a theoretical chance of winning and a significant chance of going to the championship game. Much better ROI with lower expenditures.
I don’t think any so called G5 school is investing with thoughts of winning national championship in football. Hell I’d garner to say about 50% of the P5 schools invest knowing they’ll never touch or even get a taste at a chance for a national championship.
Top 2 reasons to invest in football just off the top of head zero research or data for this, but my argument would be:
1) To be positioned well if/when next realignment occurs
2) The UCFs, Boise’s etc. added an additional brand image that the University represents that trickles down to all other athletic sports and even into students deciding where to attend.
I'd propose a subsidy cutoff point...how about...don't let the subsidy get above 50% if you are not a P5?
Nice, so you've got nothing to complain about as we're under 50% and we can get back to talking about the football players who made All-AAC teams...
|
|
12-06-2019 09:22 AM |
|
converrl
All American
Posts: 4,915
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 50
I Root For:
Location:
|
RE: All AAC teams
(12-06-2019 09:22 AM)BearcatMan Wrote: (12-06-2019 06:24 AM)converrl Wrote: (12-05-2019 11:29 PM)natibeast21 Wrote: (12-05-2019 11:20 PM)converrl Wrote: (12-05-2019 05:03 PM)BearcatMan Wrote: I'm more referring to this being a conversation about football and football player performance that basketball doesn't need to be interjected into just because someone refuses to recognize the sport and it's value to the school.
NEVER said it wasn't a value to the school...it's a revenue sport...DID say that the spending should be tracked to realistic expectations. A P5 should spoend like a P5, everyone else needs to think long and hard before investing P5 level $$$ in the hopes of a NC...won't ever happen.
MBB is totally different...make the field of 64 and you have a theoretical chance of winning and a significant chance of going to the championship game. Much better ROI with lower expenditures.
I don’t think any so called G5 school is investing with thoughts of winning national championship in football. Hell I’d garner to say about 50% of the P5 schools invest knowing they’ll never touch or even get a taste at a chance for a national championship.
Top 2 reasons to invest in football just off the top of head zero research or data for this, but my argument would be:
1) To be positioned well if/when next realignment occurs
2) The UCFs, Boise’s etc. added an additional brand image that the University represents that trickles down to all other athletic sports and even into students deciding where to attend.
I'd propose a subsidy cutoff point...how about...don't let the subsidy get above 50% if you are not a P5?
Nice, so you've got nothing to complain about as we're under 50% and we can get back to talking about the football players who made All-AAC teams...
We are in the danger zone at 45%.
|
|
12-06-2019 01:55 PM |
|