No More FCS Games For Big Ten

[cdizzle86]

Edited July 31, 2015 by cdizzle86

[Ben Gooding]

Yes sir!!!! Chaching

[UNT90]

Sigh...

 

the answer isn't to raise the price, the answer is to refuse to play them (as a G5 group) until they moderate their behavior and agree to allow for a competitive playing field. 

 

But it it will never happen. Whorin is just sooooo much fun.

[UNT86]

For once, I kinda agree with UNT90.  But, there is a drawback to complete refusal to play them.

By refusing to play them, the only one's it puts pressure on is the schools at the middle to bottom of each conference.  Those schools typically need the wins over schools our size to get bowl eligible.  Without the teams in CUSA and the Sun Belt, those schools in the middle of the bigger conferences will become the home wins for those at the top.  They will have a hard time getting bowl eligible with their out of conference games being the top schools of the other conferences (or they could beat up on each other, but that doesn't solve the problem either).

Also, by complete refusal, we give the big schools what they want.  They get to become their own division within the NCAA and we all become second tier by our own choice.  I think that is a dangerous route, because there will be NO going back.

[Ben Gooding]

We're playing P5 rather we like it or not. Granted we don't have to nor should we play them every year. This is a step in the direction of not having to play them every year because we can charge premium rate once all P5 inevitably implements this policy. Instead of 800k, charge a minimum of 1.6M for our services. Double the prices and cut the output in half. Or double the prices and play P5 2/3 years. This also allows more room for the G5 to negotiate 1&1's granted we have a good AD in place. 

[UNT90]

For once, I kinda agree with UNT90.  But, there is a drawback to complete refusal to play them.

By refusing to play them, the only one's it puts pressure on is the schools at the middle to bottom of each conference.  Those schools typically need the wins over schools our size to get bowl eligible.  Without the teams in CUSA and the Sun Belt, those schools in the middle of the bigger conferences will become the home wins for those at the top.  They will have a hard time getting bowl eligible with their out of conference games being the top schools of the other conferences (or they could beat up on each other, but that doesn't solve the problem either).

Also, by complete refusal, we give the big schools what they want.  They get to become their own division within the NCAA and we all become second tier by our own choice.  I think that is a dangerous route, because there will be NO going back.

there is no going back from where we are now. The refusal should be accompanied by a class action anti-trust lawsuit. That would put IMMEMSE pressure on the P5 and would call to the attend of the non-college football fan that there is something very wrong occurring in big time college athletics.

 

But we like to whore, so a whorin' we will go.

[DallasGreen]

there is no going back from where we are now. The refusal should be accompanied by a class action anti-trust lawsuit. That would put IMMEMSE pressure on the P5 and would call to the attend of the non-college football fan that there is something very wrong occurring in big time college athletics.

 

But we like to whore, so a whorin' we will go.

I agree that the P5 have presented Anti-Trust in its definition. I would think the G5 have a very viable lawsuit. I also agree with your student fee comment on the previous thread. You can bet any increase in student fee will be modest at best in 2016. We like bragging rights to being the cheapest ride anywhere. No mention of you get what you pay for and cheapest is not the best. Why BOR and admins fear the students is ludicrous. No other university comparable or even lower for that matter lets trepidation of its students be a factor in raising student athletic fees. If they don't agree, they are free to leave for what they find to be cheaper. Unless they go to Western Governors University, they WILL NOT find a cheaper venue even with a fee increase.

Edited August 1, 2015 by DallasGreen

[Ben Gooding]

Who cares what the students think? Seriously? As DallasGreen pointed out, they are more than welcome to leave if they don't like it. It's really as simple as that. The fee would go unnoticed by the vast majority if it wasn't brought up. They need to max this sucker out. This is a very big step for this university if it gets topped out and that decision alone would persuade me to increase my donorship. It would show me that they are on the brink of seriousness. 

[Harry]

The price going up is not a bad thing for C-USA.  If we have to do payday games lets at least make some bank.

[UNT90]

So we can be one of them there classy whores, eh?

 

I got news for you. Richard Greer ain't coming to Apogee with roses and champaign, so...

[Harry]

So we can be one of them there classy whores, eh?

 

I got news for you. Richard Greer ain't coming to Apogee with roses and champaign, so...

believe me - I wish our schedule could be like Marshall's was last year.  Until then I would like to see our teams make good money for these non conference body baggers.

[forevereagle]

Who cares what the students think? Seriously? As DallasGreen pointed out, they are more than welcome to leave if they don't like it. It's really as simple as that. The fee would go unnoticed by the vast majority if it wasn't brought up. They need to max this sucker out. This is a very big step for this university if it gets topped out and that decision alone would persuade me to increase my donorship. It would show me that they are on the brink of seriousness. 

This seems like a great idea. Who cares about the students and future alumni and their thoughts and attitudes about UNT? It's not like we want them to possibly donate to the AD and university and attend games after they graduate. Easy to say "screw the students" when you aren't one.

[wardly]

G5 should move up the ladder, just like high school classification. That would give us 3 official tiers in college football. Tier 1 could play tier 2 in non conference, 2's could play both 1's and 3's, and 3's could play 2's. North Texas and CUSA would remain at tier 2.[ What do you want? what do you need? What are you willing to PAY for?]

[Ben Gooding]

This seems like a great idea. Who cares about the students and future alumni and their thoughts and attitudes about UNT? It's not like we want them to possibly donate to the AD and university and attend games after they graduate. Easy to say "screw the students" when you aren't one.

Well, actually, I am. Still pretty easy for me to say. It's what is in the best interest of the university. 

[Arkstfan]

This isn't for sure a good thing.

Right now the college model for all the sound and fury about TV money isn't driven by TV money the way the NFL, NBA, MLB are. The real money in college football remains ticket sales, donations, and sponsorships (or university money or student fees).

One thing that is different from college vs pros is that the pros can get by just fine if they don't sell tickets. College has carved a different niche where playing a couple tomato cans to bolster wins and losses is essential.

Big 10 believes that getting into the playoff means playing tougher tomato cans, Big XII so far hasn't bought in despite what happened last year and prefers to blame the lack of a title game instead of assigning blame to the one true champion playing FCS NW State, 5-6 Buffalo and 1-11 SMU. We saw this play out with the G5 slot with the committee dissing Marshalls terrible FCS opponent and two very bad MAC opponents and one mediocre MAC (yes I know they had a game cancelled but the committee looks at the games actually played) vs. Boise's schedule and before they faltered, ECU's schedule.

If the Big 10's strategy appears to work and the money looks like it will work, scaling back G5 games is the next logical step.

[Mean Green 93-98]

If the Big 10's strategy appears to work and the money looks like it will work, scaling back G5 games is the next logical step.

I don't see that happening anytime soon.  Schools still need Ws to maintain interest in their program, and schools that aren't going to be able to find many of them among the P5s will need to look to G5s.

[Side Show Joe]

This isn't for sure a good thing.

Right now the college model for all the sound and fury about TV money isn't driven by TV money the way the NFL, NBA, MLB are. The real money in college football remains ticket sales, donations, and sponsorships (or university money or student fees).

One thing that is different from college vs pros is that the pros can get by just fine if they don't sell tickets. College has carved a different niche where playing a couple tomato cans to bolster wins and losses is essential.

Big 10 believes that getting into the playoff means playing tougher tomato cans, Big XII so far hasn't bought in despite what happened last year and prefers to blame the lack of a title game instead of assigning blame to the one true champion playing FCS NW State, 5-6 Buffalo and 1-11 SMU. We saw this play out with the G5 slot with the committee dissing Marshalls terrible FCS opponent and two very bad MAC opponents and one mediocre MAC (yes I know they had a game cancelled but the committee looks at the games actually played) vs. Boise's schedule and before they faltered, ECU's schedule.

If the Big 10's strategy appears to work and the money looks like it will work, scaling back G5 games is the next logical step.

Can't see that happening. The P5 conferences would get a lot fewer teams into bowl and lose money if they only played themselves. P5 conferences have no interest in leaving money on the table. If more P5 conferences move to stop playing FCS teams, it should be good for G5 conferences.

[Arkstfan]

Right now the going rate for the early season neutral site clashes is $5 million per team.

Let's not forget that G5-P5 games and FCS-P5 games are starting to end up on ESPN3 and Conference Network+ channels that not all channel subscribers receive.

Name one conference negotiating a television deal other than CUSA in the next two years.

Big Ten. Hummm they put the word out to bidders they aren't going to be dumping them any FCS games. That won't impact the TV deal.

Added perspective. ESPN bought the rights to the US Open Tennis tournament. Weekend before the finals there will be ZERO football games on ESPN2 and they are scrambling to meet their contract obligations. What would ESPN do if the Power 5 quit dumping unattractive games on them? Most likely pay more.

Watch what happens ahead of the next round of TV. SEC, Pac-12, ACC, and Big XII (if it still exists) will all be touting their new tougher scheduling standards that bar FCS games and discourage G5 games.

 

[untjim1995]

In all seriousness, FCS games against FBS teams shouldn't even be allowed because of the scholarshp differential alone.

This is a good thing for the big Ten to do. There are plenty of MAC, SBC, and CUSA schools to get a bought game from. The Big Ten's revenuees are huge--they know that playing a FCS opponent won't help their bottom line to get intot he playoff system anymore. So pay a few hundred grand more to play Idaho than Idaho State and you don't get crushed for it in the media if it comes down to matchignup with another school in a different conference.

I've never minded playing P5 money games--we obviously have to have them, just like most G5 schools. But except for when we play Iowa, all of our money games have been against southern powerhouses for the last 10 years. LSU, UT, OU, Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, Clemson, Tennessee, Florida, and Texas A&M. We have basically learned that northern and western P5s are more beatable than the southern schools, plus playing games later in the year for OOC has also helped the G5 team to be more competitive. If we had a better team this year, the Tennessee game would actually fall at the best time it could for us--late in the season instead of opening the year as the Christians being fed to the lions.  I just think RV needs to call more Pac schools, B1G schools, and northern schools in the ACC and SEC. Colorado, Kansas, Mizzou, Kentucky, UNC, NC State, UVa, Maryland, and Rutgers are all teams I'd be glad to play as a one time bodybag opponent.

[MeanGreenDadx2]

Who cares what the students think? Seriously? As DallasGreen pointed out, they are more than welcome to leave if they don't like it. It's really as simple as that. The fee would go unnoticed by the vast majority if it wasn't brought up. They need to max this sucker out. This is a very big step for this university if it gets topped out and that decision alone would persuade me to increase my donorship. It would show me that they are on the brink of seriousness. 

and

Well, actually, I am. Still pretty easy for me to say. It's what is in the best interest of the university. 

You say "Who cares what the students think?" then you say "Well, actually, I am" a student (I added the student).  So why should anyone care what you think since you are a student?

Then you quoted DallasGreen "As DallasGreen pointed out, they are more than welcome to leave if they don't like it." who was referring to the students.  As you are a student (see reference above) if you don't like the current fee situation you can follow DallasGreen's words about leaving.  But I guess since you know "It's what is in the best interest of the university.", I assume you will stay.

[Ben Gooding]

Uhhh ok? I'm a student. The fee needs to be raised. Some students will bitch about it. Is it fair? Who cares about fair? Absorb the micro increase and move on. I'm not a normal student. I donate, buy season tickets (though I can get in free) and I'm in the MGC. If there are students that fall in that category then I would say let them all voice their opinion, no? 

[MeanGreenDadx2]

It is your opinion that the fee needs to be raised.  Yes, some students will bitch about it, they care about it being raised and they care about it not being fair.  They could make a point about the raise not benefitting them, it only benefits the Athletic Dept.  Then you say you're not a normal student and give in other ways.  So one of your priorities in expenditure of your money is spending/donating towards the Athletic Dept.  The other students can say we already shell out fee money for the AD, why the increase?  Since the BOR controls the fee amounts, why increase it this year and not the previous years?  You and the others who want to max out the AD fees need to sell it to the students.  Don't cop an attitude about paying it and move on or don't tell them if they don't like it, leave.  Don't alienate the people who provide the largest attendance block at Apogee.  By paying  the current AD fees they also are making a donation (paying off the Apogee loan).  You want them to come back to attend games and donate to the University.  Do not take a condescending attitude or a don't care attitude.  People wonder why the alumni in the area don't attend or donate.  Hmmmm.  

[UNT90]

believe me - I wish our schedule could be like Marshall's was last year.  Until then I would like to see our teams make good money for these non conference body baggers.

That will never happen until the current AD decides to retire.

 

Because he can apparent take a dump at the 50 yard line 5 minutes before kickoff of the home opener without consequences. 

[Ben Gooding]

It is your opinion that the fee needs to be raised.  Yes, some students will bitch about it, they care about it being raised and they care about it not being fair.  They could make a point about the raise not benefitting them, it only benefits the Athletic Dept.  Then you say you're not a normal student and give in other ways.  So one of your priorities in expenditure of your money is spending/donating towards the Athletic Dept.  The other students can say we already shell out fee money for the AD, why the increase?  Since the BOR controls the fee amounts, why increase it this year and not the previous years?  You and the others who want to max out the AD fees need to sell it to the students.  Don't cop an attitude about paying it and move on or don't tell them if they don't like it, leave.  Don't alienate the people who provide the largest attendance block at Apogee.  By paying  the current AD fees they also are making a donation (paying off the Apogee loan).  You want them to come back to attend games and donate to the University.  Do not take a condescending attitude or a don't care attitude.  People wonder why the alumni in the area don't attend or donate.  Hmmmm.  

We need it because we have the lowest student fee amongst our peers and it may be a deciding factor to success on the field and being left in the dust by the likes of utsa. 

The alum do not donate bc of our prolonged history of having a gigantic music department. Music majors are typically poor. That is a trend that is changing very fast. 

[Censored by Laurie]

The alum do not donate bc of our prolonged history of having a gigantic music department. Music majors are typically poor. 

I'm gonna assume you have some numbers behind this? 

if you could post them, that'd be swell.