Is the ACC falling apart?

[joelef]

I think NIL and transfer portal has decreased the gap towards the top. That’s at least the way things appeared this past recruiting cycle. These tier 2 teams have some money to throw around that the tier 1 teams can’t match for what would be depth for them.

Gonna wreck everybody after tier 2 though.

Parity has never existed in college football

 

[tucker3434]

Parity has never existed in college football

I think there will be more of it in the future. UGA doesn’t have more resources than Bama, Texas, or A&M. And they’re not that far ahead of LSU, Tennessee, Florida or Auburn. If everybody can open the checkbook, talent is going to get spread around a bit.

But when it comes to GA State or Tech that’s just going to continue to get worse.

 

[End of Line]

Sure, but the onus on saving programs isn't on the players. They have a limited window to play and most won't turn pro, and of those that do turn pro then most won't last very long. Players absolutely deserve the chance to play where they want and to cash out whenever they want, same as how coaches and administrators can and do jump ships at the drop of a hat, too.

And I say that as an Illini fan. I think we'll be fine competing for talent in basketball, but let's be clear I fully realize that we're more than one step down on the list of top targets for elite football players to join.

Still blows my mind that your Illini won the Big Ten and went to the Sugar Bowl in 2001

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Still blows my mind that your Illini won the Big Ten and went to the Sugar Bowl in 2001

Hey, the Illini were powerhouses back in the day.

And then the color television was invented.

 

[End of Line]

Hey, the Illini were powerhouses back in the day.

And then the color television was invented.

It was a dark day in 2007 for me too , the Juice was loose

 

[KevFu]

Sure you can if you actually believe in the amateurism that the ncaa and the anti nil pearl clenchers pushes

These things are in no way related. Any "anti-NIL" stance you may perceive as coming from me isn't because of a belief in amateurism, it's pragmatism that:

#1 - NIL will never work, because NO ONE CARES about the players' name, image and likeness independent of the school brand. And you can go through this site, see what I wrote before hand and seen that it has 100% played out exactly like I predicted it would.

#2 - There's no way to have pure laissez-faire capitalism in college sports without slashing the amount of relevant parties from college athletics, which is far less fair to schools/fans than players accepting their only real value in the NIL world is tied to the school brand.


And the comments in this thread show how so many people only view "The Tip of the Iceberg" as what "College Sports" IS, when there's far more to it than that.

You guys are talking about how NIL and paying players is going to CREATE more parity, because "tier 2" schools have the same amount of money from TV contracts to go buy players that otherwise were only going to "tier 1 schools."

But you're still only talking about the top 19% of all Division I schools. It's all catastrophic for the other 81%...


And everything that's WRONG about college sports in your eyes is basically either almost exclusively FOUND WITHIN, or CAUSED BY the 19%.

And absolutely none of it gets better by professionalizing the whole thing because unlike the pro leagues (Who act as partners) the schools are actively trying to destroy each other.

There's no parity in English Premier League, and they share their TV money! England can't just add Bayern Munich, PSG, Real Madrid, Barcelona and just crush four other leagues.... The P4 have already done exactly that: The Pac-12 is the EIGHTH conference they've destroyed by stealing teams.

If you want what's best for everyone, where we are at is the absolute worst place to be in compared to any other point on the timeline.

 

[joelef]

These things are in no way related. Any "anti-NIL" stance you may perceive as coming from me isn't because of a belief in amateurism, it's pragmatism that:

#1 - NIL will never work, because NO ONE CARES about the players' name, image and likeness independent of the school brand. And you can go through this site, see what I wrote before hand and seen that it has 100% played out exactly like I predicted it would.

#2 - There's no way to have pure laissez-faire capitalism in college sports without slashing the amount of relevant parties from college athletics, which is far less fair to schools/fans than players accepting their only real value in the NIL world is tied to the school brand.


And the comments in this thread show how so many people only view "The Tip of the Iceberg" as what "College Sports" IS, when there's far more to it than that.

You guys are talking about how NIL and paying players is going to CREATE more parity, because "tier 2" schools have the same amount of money from TV contracts to go buy players that otherwise were only going to "tier 1 schools."

But you're still only talking about the top 19% of all Division I schools. It's all catastrophic for the other 81%...


And everything that's WRONG about college sports in your eyes is basically either almost exclusively FOUND WITHIN, or CAUSED BY the 19%.

And absolutely none of it gets better by professionalizing the whole thing because unlike the pro leagues (Who act as partners) the schools are actively trying to destroy each other.

There's no parity in English Premier League, and they share their TV money! England can't just add Bayern Munich, PSG, Real Madrid, Barcelona and just crush four other leagues.... The P4 have already done exactly that: The Pac-12 is the EIGHTH conference they've destroyed by stealing teams.

If you want what's best for everyone, where we are at is the absolute worst place to be in compared to any other point on the timeline.

Im
Saying you can’t act like a professional sport and an amateur beer league at the time . You can’t have multi million tv deals and coaches flying around in private jets and not expect a player who doesn’t get any of that money to not want to participate it in. Either be truly amateur and pay no one involved with college athletics or act like the professional league you are.

These things are in no way related. Any "anti-NIL" stance you may perceive as coming from me isn't because of a belief in amateurism, it's pragmatism that:

#1 - NIL will never work, because NO ONE CARES about the players' name, image and likeness independent of the school brand. And you can go through this site, see what I wrote before hand and seen that it has 100% played out exactly like I predicted it would.

#2 - There's no way to have pure laissez-faire capitalism in college sports without slashing the amount of relevant parties from college athletics, which is far less fair to schools/fans than players accepting their only real value in the NIL world is tied to the school brand.


And the comments in this thread show how so many people only view "The Tip of the Iceberg" as what "College Sports" IS, when there's far more to it than that.

You guys are talking about how NIL and paying players is going to CREATE more parity, because "tier 2" schools have the same amount of money from TV contracts to go buy players that otherwise were only going to "tier 1 schools."

But you're still only talking about the top 19% of all Division I schools. It's all catastrophic for the other 81%...


And everything that's WRONG about college sports in your eyes is basically either almost exclusively FOUND WITHIN, or CAUSED BY the 19%.

And absolutely none of it gets better by professionalizing the whole thing because unlike the pro leagues (Who act as partners) the schools are actively trying to destroy each other.

There's no parity in English Premier League, and they share their TV money! England can't just add Bayern Munich, PSG, Real Madrid, Barcelona and just crush four other leagues.... The P4 have already done exactly that: The Pac-12 is the EIGHTH conference they've destroyed by stealing teams.

If you want what's best for everyone, where we are at is the absolute worst place to be in compared to any other point on the timeline.

It doesn’t matter if no one’s cares . The model is illegal regardless of your feelings.

 

[KevFu]

Im Saying you can’t act like a professional sport and an amateur beer league at the time . You can’t have multi million tv deals and coaches flying around in private jets and not expect a player who doesn’t get any of that money to not want to participate it in. Either be truly amateur and pay no one involved with college athletics or act like the professional league you are.

See that's the needle to thread.

I've said many a time that the college business model and the business model of high school sports and little league are the exact same thing. The only reason that people are upset about that model for college is the massive dollar amounts due to the fan demand that doesn't exist in HS/LL.

You simply can't have a big, organized, nationwide thing that doesn't have employees doing the organization, period. There's nothing inherently wrong with the model. The model leads to things that are inherently wrong, but that's due to lack of control by the toothless self-governance, not the model.

And once again, you bring up the "evils" of the schools exploiting players only in a context of that 19%, the Power Four.

The problem with multi-million dollar TV deals is that the Power Four have 95% of the TV money, so they can spend that money on private jets and bidding wars for coaches. The REST of the 81% isn't playing that game. And it's the 81% that's being destroyed by this.

You don't solve a snake infestation by making a snake sanctuary with an amply supply of mice. You get rid of the snakes.

This isn't the model you'd have if you were starting college sports from scratch, but it's the reactionary, self-governing by the big schools that got us here.

The rules are designed to have a level playing field for all the schools, and every change to those rules have made things less fair and less equitable. Raising the minimum standards for what needs to be provided to athletes, and PROTECTS athletes should be the goal.

This ain't it.

It doesn’t matter if no one’s cares . The model is illegal regardless of your feelings.

Has nothing to do with my feelings, it's simple math and common sense. The vast majority of sports fans who aren't really "inside" on college athletics only consider Power Five football and men's basketball; the tip of the iceberg. The business is college sports. Stanford Fencing is part of that business.

Everything is predicated on the false idea that the schools bring in hundreds of millions in profits and the athletes aren't fairly compensated and should therefore get cash.

#1 - Fairly compensated is totally subjective. The market for players of their skill level is NOT the billions of dollars the average ignorant fan thinks it is. Professional basketball players in the G-League get compensated far less than NCAA players; and play in front of smaller crowds, too.

#2 - There's no profits, schools are non-profit, all of the revenue goes into things that CORPORATIONS are under no legal obligation to provide employees. But hey, now that we're professionalizing college sports, let's talk about what that's going to bring.

I'll put in a new post so you can look at it in 10 years.

 

[joelef]

See that's the needle to thread.

I've said many a time that the college business model and the business model of high school sports and little league are the exact same thing. The only reason that people are upset about that model for college is the massive dollar amounts due to the fan demand that doesn't exist in HS/LL.

You simply can't have a big, organized, nationwide thing that doesn't have employees doing the organization, period. There's nothing inherently wrong with the model. The model leads to things that are inherently wrong, but that's due to lack of control by the toothless self-governance, not the model.

And once again, you bring up the "evils" of the schools exploiting players only in a context of that 19%, the Power Four.

The problem with multi-million dollar TV deals is that the Power Four have 95% of the TV money, so they can spend that money on private jets and bidding wars for coaches. The REST of the 81% isn't playing that game. And it's the 81% that's being destroyed by this.

You don't solve a snake infestation by making a snake sanctuary with an amply supply of mice. You get rid of the snakes.

This isn't the model you'd have if you were starting college sports from scratch, but it's the reactionary, self-governing by the big schools that got us here.

The rules are designed to have a level playing field for all the schools, and every change to those rules have made things less fair and less equitable. Raising the minimum standards for what needs to be provided to athletes, and PROTECTS athletes should be the goal.

This ain't it.




Has nothing to do with my feelings, it's simple math and common sense. The vast majority of sports fans who aren't really "inside" on college athletics only consider Power Five football and men's basketball; the tip of the iceberg. The business is college sports. Stanford Fencing is part of that business.

Everything is predicated on the false idea that the schools bring in hundreds of millions in profits and the athletes aren't fairly compensated and should therefore get cash.

#1 - Fairly compensated is totally subjective. The market for players of their skill level is NOT the billions of dollars the average ignorant fan thinks it is. Professional basketball players in the G-League get compensated far less than NCAA players; and play in front of smaller crowds, too.

#2 - There's no profits, schools are non-profit, all of the revenue goes into things that CORPORATIONS are under no legal obligation to provide employees. But hey, now that we're professionalizing college sports, let's talk about what that's going to bring.

I'll put in a new post so you can look at it in 10 years.

High school and little are vastly different from college sports . For one thing they are under age which means that there going to have restrictions unlike 18 year ADULTS college students. Secondly little league and high schools are run by mostly run by volunteers and coaches rely have “ day jobs”. The ncaa could certainly make all there employees volunteers at keep them to a minimum.

 

[KevFu]

Professionalizing the NCAA is a Pandora's box that's going to work out terribly for the student-athletes, just like NIL and how that turned out exactly like I said.

NOW, let's pause right here. Student-athletes "getting more" is good. No one is saying they shouldn't be able to get more. No one wants them to be indentured. But we're talking KANTIAN here. You're gonna tell me it's good for Caleb Williams and Caitlin Clark to get millions from their NIL. And it is. But that was coming anyway the second the Bears and Fever drafted them #1 overall.

We're talking EVERYBODY. Who's it not good for.


Well, #1 - if you're not on a Power Five/Four roster, it's absolutely worse just as an experience. It's just straight up impossible to have the experience the NCAA ads like to showcase when you're at a school without the same resources as the Power Five. Look at who's in the championships, even in the sports that aren't football/basketball. Now Softball and Baseball are dominated by the SEC solely because ESPN has told everyone from 8 years that the SEC just means more. 81% is bigger than 19%, so across the board, it's worse for 81% of all athletes.

#2 - That's before expenses begin to be managed. Companies have lay-offs. I mentioned it in the thread about what this means for NCAA hockey and junior players. Non-revenue sports cost money and now that money has to go to paying players. Keeping up with the Big Ten and SEC paying players is going make every school assess what they fund.

AN ABSOLUTE CRAPTON OF NCAA SPORT PROGRAMS ARE GOING TO BE CUT.

Big Z said Cal should buy Oracle and add a hockey team. Cal just went from $15m behind the SEC to $45 million behind the SEC, they ain't adding sports. They're cutting sports.

A crap ton of support staff is going to be cut, too. One AD joked, OUT LOUD, "Say goodbye to the Sports Information Department." I'll get back to that.


#3 - Employees can be fired when they don't do their jobs well. So we've decided that players are in fact employees, who gets to decide if a player isn't doing their job?


#4 - Taxable income. I could have taken free classes for an MBA with tuition remission. But I could not afford the free classes, because it counts as taxable income and would lower my net pay after taxes to far less than I could live off of.

So what's going to happen when Room, Board, gym membership, massages, sneakers, clothing, etc, etc, becomes taxable income? There's Jobs where employees are required to buy their own uniforms. I doubt the big schools are going to cut those things for athletes simply because they want to win. But they very well could pull the "you didn't read the fine print" crap on a bunch of 18-22 year olds.

#5 - All of this is putting things backwards: What about actual school? Do NOT be surprised when NCAA Grad Rates have some kind of new system or policy, or just get completely ignored. Grad rates are going to plummet.



Now all this is a lot of words to say "This is bad for well over 81% of Division I, and only good for the very tippy top of the 19%" And by Kantian theory, 81% is bigger than 19%, so it's absolutely going to be overall bad.

But you're going to argue back at me about unions and what the players deserve, and at the end of the day it's going to boil down to what you care about. It's no skin off your ass if that AD just cuts his Sports Information Department. To the very real people in Sports Information, and coaches, and athletic trainers and support staff. The people at Pac-12 Network, it's very real. And it sucks. A lot.

The hardest part of policy arguments is that you can't really break through with someone who doesn't get YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO OTHER PEOPLE.


The number of people this helps are casual fans who only care that their big school wins; and very tippy-top of athletes who were going to get paid at the next level anyway. Everyone else is going to get Effed. Royally.

But if you only care about feeling superior in an argument to that of the selfish people who've led the NCAA to this point (which isn't exactly difficult, you shouldn't getting any self esteem from being better than them), then jumping in with the mega industry of sports entertainment and not being bothered by the massive exploitation coming is totally fine. But the number of actual human beings whose lives are going to be worse off by all this is inarguably going to be higher than who actually benefits.

 

[joelef]

Professionalizing the NCAA is a Pandora's box that's going to work out terribly for the student-athletes, just like NIL and how that turned out exactly like I said.

NOW, let's pause right here. Student-athletes "getting more" is good. No one is saying they shouldn't be able to get more. No one wants them to be indentured. But we're talking KANTIAN here. You're gonna tell me it's good for Caleb Williams and Caitlin Clark to get millions from their NIL. And it is. But that was coming anyway the second the Bears and Fever drafted them #1 overall.

We're talking EVERYBODY. Who's it not good for.


Well, #1 - if you're not on a Power Five/Four roster, it's absolutely worse just as an experience. It's just straight up impossible to have the experience the NCAA ads like to showcase when you're at a school without the same resources as the Power Five. Look at who's in the championships, even in the sports that aren't football/basketball. Now Softball and Baseball are dominated by the SEC solely because ESPN has told everyone from 8 years that the SEC just means more. 81% is bigger than 19%, so across the board, it's worse for 81% of all athletes.

#2 - That's before expenses begin to be managed. Companies have lay-offs. I mentioned it in the thread about what this means for NCAA hockey and junior players. Non-revenue sports cost money and now that money has to go to paying players. Keeping up with the Big Ten and SEC paying players is going make every school assess what they fund.

AN ABSOLUTE CRAPTON OF NCAA SPORT PROGRAMS ARE GOING TO BE CUT.

Big Z said Cal should buy Oracle and add a hockey team. Cal just went from $15m behind the SEC to $45 million behind the SEC, they ain't adding sports. They're cutting sports.

A crap ton of support staff is going to be cut, too. One AD joked, OUT LOUD, "Say goodbye to the Sports Information Department." I'll get back to that.


#3 - Employees can be fired when they don't do their jobs well. So we've decided that players are in fact employees, who gets to decide if a player isn't doing their job?


#4 - Taxable income. I could have taken free classes for an MBA with tuition remission. But I could not afford the free classes, because it counts as taxable income and would lower my net pay after taxes to far less than I could live off of.

So what's going to happen when Room, Board, gym membership, massages, sneakers, clothing, etc, etc, becomes taxable income? There's Jobs where employees are required to buy their own uniforms. I doubt the big schools are going to cut those things for athletes simply because they want to win. But they very well could pull the "you didn't read the fine print" crap on a bunch of 18-22 year olds.

#5 - All of this is putting things backwards: What about actual school? Do NOT be surprised when NCAA Grad Rates have some kind of new system or policy, or just get completely ignored. Grad rates are going to plummet.



Now all this is a lot of words to say "This is bad for well over 81% of Division I, and only good for the very tippy top of the 19%" And by Kantian theory, 81% is bigger than 19%, so it's absolutely going to be overall bad.

But you're going to argue back at me about unions and what the players deserve, and at the end of the day it's going to boil down to what you care about. It's no skin off your ass if that AD just cuts his Sports Information Department. To the very real people in Sports Information, and coaches, and athletic trainers and support staff. The people at Pac-12 Network, it's very real. And it sucks. A lot.

The hardest part of policy arguments is that you can't really break through with someone who doesn't get YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO OTHER PEOPLE.


The number of people this helps are casual fans who only care that their big school wins; and very tippy-top of athletes who were going to get paid at the next level anyway. Everyone else is going to get Effed. Royally.

But if you only care about feeling superior in an argument to that of the selfish people who've led the NCAA to this point (which isn't exactly difficult, you shouldn't getting any self esteem from being better than them), then jumping in with the mega industry of sports entertainment and not being bothered by the massive exploitation coming is totally fine. But the number of actual human beings whose lives are going to be worse off by all this is inarguably going to be higher than who actually benefits.

The ncaa and the schools could’ve rejected alll the money and turn them not real amateur student run club programs instead they decided that they put there hands and grabbed all the money. It’s has nothing to do with being superior .

 

[joelef]

Professionalizing the NCAA is a Pandora's box that's going to work out terribly for the student-athletes, just like NIL and how that turned out exactly like I said.

NOW, let's pause right here. Student-athletes "getting more" is good. No one is saying they shouldn't be able to get more. No one wants them to be indentured. But we're talking KANTIAN here. You're gonna tell me it's good for Caleb Williams and Caitlin Clark to get millions from their NIL. And it is. But that was coming anyway the second the Bears and Fever drafted them #1 overall.

We're talking EVERYBODY. Who's it not good for.


Well, #1 - if you're not on a Power Five/Four roster, it's absolutely worse just as an experience. It's just straight up impossible to have the experience the NCAA ads like to showcase when you're at a school without the same resources as the Power Five. Look at who's in the championships, even in the sports that aren't football/basketball. Now Softball and Baseball are dominated by the SEC solely because ESPN has told everyone from 8 years that the SEC just means more. 81% is bigger than 19%, so across the board, it's worse for 81% of all athletes.

#2 - That's before expenses begin to be managed. Companies have lay-offs. I mentioned it in the thread about what this means for NCAA hockey and junior players. Non-revenue sports cost money and now that money has to go to paying players. Keeping up with the Big Ten and SEC paying players is going make every school assess what they fund.

AN ABSOLUTE CRAPTON OF NCAA SPORT PROGRAMS ARE GOING TO BE CUT.

Big Z said Cal should buy Oracle and add a hockey team. Cal just went from $15m behind the SEC to $45 million behind the SEC, they ain't adding sports. They're cutting sports.

A crap ton of support staff is going to be cut, too. One AD joked, OUT LOUD, "Say goodbye to the Sports Information Department." I'll get back to that.


#3 - Employees can be fired when they don't do their jobs well. So we've decided that players are in fact employees, who gets to decide if a player isn't doing their job?


#4 - Taxable income. I could have taken free classes for an MBA with tuition remission. But I could not afford the free classes, because it counts as taxable income and would lower my net pay after taxes to far less than I could live off of.

So what's going to happen when Room, Board, gym membership, massages, sneakers, clothing, etc, etc, becomes taxable income? There's Jobs where employees are required to buy their own uniforms. I doubt the big schools are going to cut those things for athletes simply because they want to win. But they very well could pull the "you didn't read the fine print" crap on a bunch of 18-22 year olds.

#5 - All of this is putting things backwards: What about actual school? Do NOT be surprised when NCAA Grad Rates have some kind of new system or policy, or just get completely ignored. Grad rates are going to plummet.



Now all this is a lot of words to say "This is bad for well over 81% of Division I, and only good for the very tippy top of the 19%" And by Kantian theory, 81% is bigger than 19%, so it's absolutely going to be overall bad.

But you're going to argue back at me about unions and what the players deserve, and at the end of the day it's going to boil down to what you care about. It's no skin off your ass if that AD just cuts his Sports Information Department. To the very real people in Sports Information, and coaches, and athletic trainers and support staff. The people at Pac-12 Network, it's very real. And it sucks. A lot.

The hardest part of policy arguments is that you can't really break through with someone who doesn't get YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO OTHER PEOPLE.


The number of people this helps are casual fans who only care that their big school wins; and very tippy-top of athletes who were going to get paid at the next level anyway. Everyone else is going to get Effed. Royally.

But if you only care about feeling superior in an argument to that of the selfish people who've led the NCAA to this point (which isn't exactly difficult, you shouldn't getting any self esteem from being better than them), then jumping in with the mega industry of sports entertainment and not being bothered by the massive exploitation coming is totally fine. But the number of actual human beings whose lives are going to be worse off by all this is inarguably going to be higher than who actually benefits.

I do care if they cut sports but they would not be in this position in the first place if they actually acted like an amateur sport organization . Instead the selfishness of ADs , coaches, ncaa, fans and players have all created this professionalism with little to no pushback .

 

[KevFu]

Yeah, but the money flowed in turning it into a business simply because people cared enough to hand over billions of dollars with glee.

It's not like the NCAA set about to build a system that enslaved students into being pro players for no compensation.

All they did was set rules for THE SCHOOLS to have an honest competition, among the kids who decided to go to each school, and not use ringers to win. That's it. Virtually every rule they have is based on just that.


The corrupting factor isn't the NCAA themselves, it's the FANS and the cultural importance we place on "my team winning" over anything else. That's what changed the athlete experience from "Basketball can pay for my college, and I want to go to this school for my education" to the pro style free ag

 

[sneakytitz]

If I had to guess, Notre Dame is eventually going to join the ACC as a full member because of the new CFP/bye rules. The top ND brass says that doesn't matter but the prospect of finishing the season undefeated this year or any year after, ranked in the top 3 and still have to play a 4th game to win the National Championship has to frighten the hell out of them. And an injury to a key player or players in a game that could have been avoided? Fans/boosters will be calling jobs, and perhaps heads.

Anyways, if that happens, I highly doubt Florida State or Clemson go anywhere.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

If I had to guess, Notre Dame is eventually going to join the ACC as a full member because of the new CFP/bye rules. The top ND brass says that doesn't matter but the prospect of finishing the season undefeated this year or any year after, ranked in the top 3 and still have to play a 4th game to win the National Championship has to frighten the hell out of them. And an injury to a key player or players in a game that could have been avoided? Fans/boosters will be calling jobs, and perhaps heads.

Anyways, if that happens, I highly doubt Florida State or Clemson go anywhere.

I've proposed the CFP bracket be divided along the Mason-Dixon line, with 6 teams from the South playing for one spot in the title game and 6 teams from outside the South playing for the other spot.

This would permit ND and teams who didn't win their conference to have first-round byes if they are ranked high enough.

 

[QuizGuy66]

There is no way that the ACC would be the conference that ND would give up their precious independence for. And certainly not to get a bye once every 6 years.

 

[sneakytitz]

There is no way that the ACC would be the conference that ND would give up their precious independence for. And certainly not to get a bye once every 6 years.

Once every 6 years?

 

[KevFu]

One of the main sticking points on Notre Dame and the Big Ten for decades is that the Big Ten is both sports conference and academic consortium, and every Big Ten member they've ever added was an AAU member.

(Nebraska has lost their status since joining, due to rule changes for the AAU regarding a medical research center. Nebraska's isn't in Lincoln, it's in Omaha).

But as that pertains to Notre Dame, the Catholic school can't be an AAU member because they're unwilling to go along with certain AAU policies (i.e. stem cell research).


That being said, the Big Ten has always seemed more willing to invite Notre Dame than UND has been willing to accept. So if anything changes for Notre Dame, chances are they'd go Big Ten before ACC.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

One of the main sticking points on Notre Dame and the Big Ten for decades is that the Big Ten is both sports conference and academic consortium, and every Big Ten member they've ever added was an AAU member.

(Nebraska has lost their status since joining, due to rule changes for the AAU regarding a medical research center. Nebraska's isn't in Lincoln, it's in Omaha).

But as that pertains to Notre Dame, the Catholic school can't be an AAU member because they're unwilling to go along with certain AAU policies (i.e. stem cell research).


That being said, the Big Ten has always seemed more willing to invite Notre Dame than UND has been willing to accept. So if anything changes for Notre Dame, chances are they'd go Big Ten before ACC.

UND joined the AAU last year.

And if ND joins the Big Ten, football won't be included in its membership. NBC wants two packages.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Once every 6 years?

I was being nice to ND they wouldn't get one of the 4 byes that often I realize

 

[sneakytitz]

I was being nice to ND they wouldn't get one of the 4 byes that often I realize

Let's assume ND played for the ACC for the last 6 seasons and the current CFP rules applied. They would have been the #1 or #2 seed in the ACC all 6 seasons and thus would have been playing for a bye (ACC Championship) in all 6 years given the final rankings of all other conference champions. So, your dog don't hunt.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

The Big Ten was interested in Notre Dame a generation ago. Since then, the media landscape has changed and the Big Ten wants to expand their market footprint. I get that the Irish are a supposed national draw, but that's not the same as being a must-have option for a state wanting to keep watching their flagship university's, or close to it, sports. Indiana is already covered, adding Notre Dame would just equate to a nebulous increase in eyeballs but no new markets.

The Big Ten interest in Notre Dame honestly feels like a thing of the past.

Not to mention that even if the Big Ten was interested, Notre Dame football not being included would be a deal-breaker.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

Not to mention that even if the Big Ten was interested, Notre Dame football not being included would be a deal-breaker.

Chicago remained in the Big Ten for several years after dropping football so there is precedent for ND not playing football in the conference.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Chicago remained in the Big Ten for several years after dropping football so there is precedent for ND not playing football in the conference.

If your example is before the living memory of any baby boomer, then you don't really have an analogous example for desired media rights for the mid-21st century by one of the major NCAA conferences.

Football is the primary driver, and that's where Notre Dame brings in value as a full member. Notre Dame's only other special value is in being a popular collegiate hockey program in Chicagoland, and as such was tapped as an associate member in that sport only. Notre Dame basketball doesn't have that same cache in Illinois or Indiana with the existing teams that the Big Ten already has, so I don't see an interest in associate or full membership extension.

 

[PCSPounder]

Yeah, but the money flowed in turning it into a business simply because people cared enough to hand over billions of dollars with glee.

It's not like the NCAA set about to build a system that enslaved students into being pro players for no compensation.

All they did was set rules for THE SCHOOLS to have an honest competition, among the kids who decided to go to each school, and not use ringers to win. That's it. Virtually every rule they have is based on just that.


The corrupting factor isn't the NCAA themselves, it's the FANS and the cultural importance we place on "my team winning" over anything else. That's what changed the athlete experience from "Basketball can pay for my college, and I want to go to this school for my education" to the pro style free ag

Time to remind everyone of the classic Jerry Tarkanian quote:

“The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky theyre going to give Cleveland State another year of probation.”

There have been curious moments when USC football and Kentucky basketball got tagged, but if the rules have generally never been applied evenly, are they really rules?

The “superconference” was always a topic of discussion back when I was a kid… kind of back when football was being invented or something like that, or so I’m told. This has never been a game where all comers were treated equally.