(03-18-2024 07:19 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/5...r-BB1k09zW

Writer has 5 takeaways=P2 permanent, ND needs to put up or shut up, Big 12 doing well for now, 2Pac are the big losers and #5:

"...The income inequality in major college football is only going to get more and more severe as the months and years go on. And even the whole thing structure of college football now is a house of cards as the future of Florida State hangs in the balance. If the Seminoles are able to exit the ACC for the greener pastures of the Big Ten or SEC, it could lead to the vultures coming to scavenge the remains of yet another former power conference. And what happens when UNC or Miami or Clemson want to join the SEC or Big Ten? The whole College Football Playoff agreement will be ripped up and done again with even more power and more revenue for the haves and less for the have nots.

What does it mean? It’s all headed towards a Big Ten-SEC NFL style breakaway. It seems inevitable at this point. The current and future revenue at stake is just too big for anyone to resist. And whatever happens along the way are just pit stops before reaching the final destination."

No offense, but this is all I need to see to discount it. The only constant in 100+ years of college sports is volatility. Nothing ever settles, nothing ever remains the same.

(03-18-2024 07:38 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-18-2024 07:19 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/5...r-BB1k09zW

Writer has 5 takeaways=P2 permanent, ND needs to put up or shut up, Big 12 doing well for now, 2Pac are the big losers and #5:

"...The income inequality in major college football is only going to get more and more severe as the months and years go on. And even the whole thing structure of college football now is a house of cards as the future of Florida State hangs in the balance. If the Seminoles are able to exit the ACC for the greener pastures of the Big Ten or SEC, it could lead to the vultures coming to scavenge the remains of yet another former power conference. And what happens when UNC or Miami or Clemson want to join the SEC or Big Ten? The whole College Football Playoff agreement will be ripped up and done again with even more power and more revenue for the haves and less for the have nots.

What does it mean? It’s all headed towards a Big Ten-SEC NFL style breakaway. It seems inevitable at this point. The current and future revenue at stake is just too big for anyone to resist. And whatever happens along the way are just pit stops before reaching the final destination."

No offense, but this is all I need to see to discount it. The only constant in 100+ years of college sports is volatility. Nothing ever settles, nothing ever remains the same.

Yeah, it does, the dead! Physical death is a constant. Spiritual death or spiritual life maybe a matter of faith, we'll know when we get there. I agree that change is a constant, and that there is no final destination for life. All of life is about adapting to change. Those who don't, die. And while those who do adapt eventually die anyway, they are usually remembered for moving things forward for it their offspring and students who advance life. It's time to move things forward! And as we do, "the dead may bury the dead."

A brief challenge: We know even the sun has a life. Humanity should be spending every generation's knowledge to find a way to another solar system, as this one is finite and all of the life we know ends when it goes supernova. Travel at the speed of the least capable and we all die. As with athletics, the pursuit of excellence and the advancement of the swiftest among us, is a glory in which all can rejoice, because giving them the freedom to excel saves all.

And a fact of science for the spiritual. Energy never ceases to exist, it merely changes form.

Could also see a further pacification of the power conferences from breaking away. Changing the equal weight assignment of NCAA credits. This is just a an example of how they can keep more of the money as with the 91% in CFP money. Opening round of NCAA 1/4 credit, field of 32 1/2 credit, sweet sixteen 1 credit, elite eight 1.5 credits, final four 2 credits, championship game 2.5 credits.

(03-18-2024 07:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-18-2024 07:38 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-18-2024 07:19 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/5...r-BB1k09zW

Writer has 5 takeaways=P2 permanent, ND needs to put up or shut up, Big 12 doing well for now, 2Pac are the big losers and #5:

"...The income inequality in major college football is only going to get more and more severe as the months and years go on. And even the whole thing structure of college football now is a house of cards as the future of Florida State hangs in the balance. If the Seminoles are able to exit the ACC for the greener pastures of the Big Ten or SEC, it could lead to the vultures coming to scavenge the remains of yet another former power conference. And what happens when UNC or Miami or Clemson want to join the SEC or Big Ten? The whole College Football Playoff agreement will be ripped up and done again with even more power and more revenue for the haves and less for the have nots.

What does it mean? It’s all headed towards a Big Ten-SEC NFL style breakaway. It seems inevitable at this point. The current and future revenue at stake is just too big for anyone to resist. And whatever happens along the way are just pit stops before reaching the final destination."

No offense, but this is all I need to see to discount it. The only constant in 100+ years of college sports is volatility. Nothing ever settles, nothing ever remains the same.

Yeah, it does, the dead! Physical death is a constant. Spiritual death or spiritual life maybe a matter of faith, we'll know when we get there. I agree that change is a constant, and that there is no final destination for life. All of life is about adapting to change. Those who don't, die. And while those who do adapt eventually die anyway, they are usually remembered for moving things forward for it their offspring and students who advance life. It's time to move things forward! And as we do, "the dead may bury the dead."

A brief challenge: We know even the sun has a life. Humanity should be spending every generation's knowledge to find a way to another solar system, as this one is finite and all of the life we know ends when it goes supernova. Travel at the speed of the least capable and we all die. As with athletics, the pursuit of excellence and the advancement of the swiftest among us, is a glory in which all can rejoice, because giving them the freedom to excel saves all.

And a fact of science for the spiritual. Energy never ceases to exist, it merely changes form.

Let’s not get philosophical. This is pure capitalism at its finest driving certain school’s decisions. That said, it’s in many other schools best interest to use their resources to fight for what they have vs getting on their knees. I say this despite the fact my school is more likely in the former category versus the latter.

(03-19-2024 12:27 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Could also see a further pacification of the power conferences from breaking away. Changing the equal weight assignment of NCAA credits. This is just a an example of how they can keep more of the money as with the 91% in CFP money. Opening round of NCAA 1/4 credit, field of 32 1/2 credit, sweet sixteen 1 credit, elite eight 1.5 credits, final four 2 credits, championship game 2.5 credits.

I like this.

(03-19-2024 12:27 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Could also see a further pacification of the power conferences from breaking away. Changing the equal weight assignment of NCAA credits. This is just a an example of how they can keep more of the money as with the 91% in CFP money. Opening round of NCAA 1/4 credit, field of 32 1/2 credit, sweet sixteen 1 credit, elite eight 1.5 credits, final four 2 credits, championship game 2.5 credits.

Doesn't help much. NCAA is skimming over 50% off the top.

(03-19-2024 02:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-19-2024 12:27 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Could also see a further pacification of the power conferences from breaking away. Changing the equal weight assignment of NCAA credits. This is just a an example of how they can keep more of the money as with the 91% in CFP money. Opening round of NCAA 1/4 credit, field of 32 1/2 credit, sweet sixteen 1 credit, elite eight 1.5 credits, final four 2 credits, championship game 2.5 credits.

Doesn't help much. NCAA is skimming over 50% off the top.

The idea for lower conferences is the same. You get either access or money. So cutout most distribution to the non power conferences. The power conferences get 45+% or 90+% of money available for distribution and those others with small athletic budgets get a token payment.

(03-19-2024 12:27 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Could also see a further pacification of the power conferences from breaking away. Changing the equal weight assignment of NCAA credits. This is just a an example of how they can keep more of the money as with the 91% in CFP money. Opening round of NCAA 1/4 credit, field of 32 1/2 credit, sweet sixteen 1 credit, elite eight 1.5 credits, final four 2 credits, championship game 2.5 credits.

I agree that the NCAA credits may change, although I think it will be almost the opposite of what you’ve stated where there would be very little or any performance incentives just like the CFP. Essentially, each non-power conference gets the same amount as one credit (as they do now) and most (if not all) of the rest of the money goes to the power conferences. Maybe there’s a de minimis performance bonus, but it would actually be significantly *less* compared to how it is now.

If I’m counting correctly, there are 132 credits available each year. (68 bids + 4 First Four+ 32 1st round + 16 2nd round + 8 3rd round + 4 4th round. I don’t believe that there are credits after getting to the Final Four.)

26 non-power conferences each get 1 credit each (19.7% of the total credits).

106 credits go to the P4 and Big East (80.3%).

That gets the NCAA Tournament revenue split close to the what the P5/G5 split is in the current CFP system. No performance bonus here - this is a straight payment to ensure that the power conferences don’t leave.

Guarantees, guarantees, guarantees.

That’s what the power conferences want. Heck, last year’s Final Four is exactly why they wouldn’t want the format that you’ve proposed. The power leagues want their money upfront win or lose. That is what has bothered them about how basketball revenue is distributed.

(03-19-2024 02:30 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-19-2024 12:27 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Could also see a further pacification of the power conferences from breaking away. Changing the equal weight assignment of NCAA credits. This is just a an example of how they can keep more of the money as with the 91% in CFP money. Opening round of NCAA 1/4 credit, field of 32 1/2 credit, sweet sixteen 1 credit, elite eight 1.5 credits, final four 2 credits, championship game 2.5 credits.

I agree that the NCAA credits may change, although I think it will be almost the opposite of what you’ve stated where there would be very little or any performance incentives just like the CFP. Essentially, each non-power conference gets the same amount as one credit (as they do now) and most (if not all) of the rest of the money goes to the power conferences. Maybe there’s a de minimis performance bonus, but it would actually be significantly *less* compared to how it is now.

If I’m counting correctly, there are 132 credits available each year. (68 bids + 4 First Four+ 32 1st round + 16 2nd round + 8 3rd round + 4 4th round. I don’t believe that there are credits after getting to the Final Four.)

26 non-power conferences each get 1 credit each (19.7% of the total credits).

106 credits go to the P4 and Big East (80.3%).

That gets the NCAA Tournament revenue split close to the what the P5/G5 split is in the current CFP system. No performance bonus here - this is a straight payment to ensure that the power conferences don’t leave.

Guarantees, guarantees, guarantees.

That’s what the power conferences want. Heck, last year’s Final Four is exactly why they wouldn’t want the format that you’ve proposed. The power leagues want their money upfront win or lose. That is what has bothered them about how basketball revenue is distributed.

Like this and probably way more realistic. My suggestion was just hiding the snub of distribution of mid and low major conferences. The P4 probably like your way better as they can control how much goes to the Big East.

(03-19-2024 02:30 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-19-2024 12:27 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Could also see a further pacification of the power conferences from breaking away. Changing the equal weight assignment of NCAA credits. This is just a an example of how they can keep more of the money as with the 91% in CFP money. Opening round of NCAA 1/4 credit, field of 32 1/2 credit, sweet sixteen 1 credit, elite eight 1.5 credits, final four 2 credits, championship game 2.5 credits.

I agree that the NCAA credits may change, although I think it will be almost the opposite of what you’ve stated where there would be very little or any performance incentives just like the CFP. Essentially, each non-power conference gets the same amount as one credit (as they do now) and most (if not all) of the rest of the money goes to the power conferences. Maybe there’s a de minimis performance bonus, but it would actually be significantly *less* compared to how it is now.

If I’m counting correctly, there are 132 credits available each year. (68 bids + 4 First Four+ 32 1st round + 16 2nd round + 8 3rd round + 4 4th round. I don’t believe that there are credits after getting to the Final Four.)

26 non-power conferences each get 1 credit each (19.7% of the total credits).

106 credits go to the P4 and Big East (80.3%).

That gets the NCAA Tournament revenue split close to the what the P5/G5 split is in the current CFP system. No performance bonus here - this is a straight payment to ensure that the power conferences don’t leave.

Guarantees, guarantees, guarantees.

That’s what the power conferences want. Heck, last year’s Final Four is exactly why they wouldn’t want the format that you’ve proposed. The power leagues want their money upfront win or lose. That is what has bothered them about how basketball revenue is distributed.

Maybe. But only getting 70-75% instead of 80% of the money is less impactful than losing more than half right off the top, and on top of being stuck with the current FAR undervalued contract. What we have today is:

Those 132 credits x 2m per = $264m, paid out over SIX LONG YEARS
Out of roughly $1b for the total tourney

What we COULD have is:
$2.5b for total tourney today
25% to managment agency =
2.5b x .75 = $1.87b
even just 70% of $1.875b is
$1.875b x .7 = $1.3B

$1.3B for just the P5 portion of the NCAAT, rather than more like $200m. Wait a minute...isn't $1.3b what we're getting from the CFP? Huh! Divide $1.3b 78 ways for the entire P5 in basketball, well lets call it 80 ways in case Gonzaga and someone else move up:

$1.3b / 80 = $16.25m per school, paid every year instead of over 6 long years

And that's with only 70% of the money. Perhaps it's 75 or 80% of a $1.5-2b instead of 70% of 2.5b, but the final number is roughly the same. And, unlike in football, there's no reason for the P2 to get any more than the others. If anything, the others might want some revenge on us, or perhaps use the new NCAAT to work towards parity in the next CFP deal.

What's really amazing about all of this is that basketball only jumps to 25%, maybe as much as 30%, even after all of that. Football has some serious staying power in the hearts and minds of Americans.

(03-19-2024 03:13 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  

(03-19-2024 02:30 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-19-2024 12:27 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Could also see a further pacification of the power conferences from breaking away. Changing the equal weight assignment of NCAA credits. This is just a an example of how they can keep more of the money as with the 91% in CFP money. Opening round of NCAA 1/4 credit, field of 32 1/2 credit, sweet sixteen 1 credit, elite eight 1.5 credits, final four 2 credits, championship game 2.5 credits.

I agree that the NCAA credits may change, although I think it will be almost the opposite of what you’ve stated where there would be very little or any performance incentives just like the CFP. Essentially, each non-power conference gets the same amount as one credit (as they do now) and most (if not all) of the rest of the money goes to the power conferences. Maybe there’s a de minimis performance bonus, but it would actually be significantly *less* compared to how it is now.

If I’m counting correctly, there are 132 credits available each year. (68 bids + 4 First Four+ 32 1st round + 16 2nd round + 8 3rd round + 4 4th round. I don’t believe that there are credits after getting to the Final Four.)

26 non-power conferences each get 1 credit each (19.7% of the total credits).

106 credits go to the P4 and Big East (80.3%).

That gets the NCAA Tournament revenue split close to the what the P5/G5 split is in the current CFP system. No performance bonus here - this is a straight payment to ensure that the power conferences don’t leave.

Guarantees, guarantees, guarantees.

That’s what the power conferences want. Heck, last year’s Final Four is exactly why they wouldn’t want the format that you’ve proposed. The power leagues want their money upfront win or lose. That is what has bothered them about how basketball revenue is distributed.

Like this and probably way more realistic. My suggestion was just hiding the snub of distribution of mid and low major conferences. The P4 probably like your way better as they can control how much goes to the Big East.

The Big East is more important to basketball than the SEC, there's no way they're not getting treated as equals in a discussion of the future of MBB. In CFB, there's now a clear gap between the P2 and the M2, in MBB there's a clear gap between the P65 and everyone else. Sometimes the A10, the MWC, the AAC, the WCC, etc etc try to close that gap, but nobody has permanently closed it, at least not yet.