OT: Spent the 4th with a reporter for SI

[SUinNYC]

He covers college sports for them. Speaks to coaches, ADs and league officials regularly. Has no dog in the fight, so to speak, just gave me his gut on the sports landscape. This stuff is merely his opinion based on the conversations he has had. Off the record. Nothing ground breaking, but I found it interesting nonetheless. Much of this corroborates what my brother in law at ESPN tells me.

Couple of nuggets:

He thinks WVU is in trouble with football recruiting (we've been saying that on this board for a while, but it was good to hear it from someone else). Can't sell a kid from the east coast on playing in Lubbock, TX. No cache. Thinks that program's best days are behind it.

Said he can see the big 4 or 5 leagues leaving the NCAA. This is a business and the NCAA rules just get in the way. The NCAA will either have to bend to these leagues or become irrelevant.

Geographically, the BIG XII is screwed. Again, not news, but said it is the most vulnerable league. B1G, PAC, ACC and SEC all make sense. He thinks PAC-12 is going after Boise and 3 BIG XII schools (he guessed Kansas and Texas--one hoops, one football and one other he wouldn't speculate on). Thought it would happen in the next five to ten years.

One of the big unspoken things that drives realignment is student body and alumni base. We heard a little bit about it with FSU, but said it was a big factor for Colorado moving. A large percentage of CU's students come from California.

At the end of our conversation, he brought up the NFL injury lawsuits. Said all this college stuff could be moot (since football drives it). His words "The NFL as we know it may not exist in a decade." Said the litigation could bankrupt the league (1000's of former players suing for $100's of millions) or make the game unrecognizable (different field configuration and rules). Said "Who wants to watch flag football? Because that's what it could be." I hope he was just exaggerating because of the beer. Because I wouldn't want to live in that world.

 

[orangenauburn]

Well that is where the NFL is headed ... these guys knew what they were getting into, so did the league. Settle with former players and make current ones pay into their own pension / healthcare programs (God knows they make enough)

 

[orangehomer]

i dont know but i think it is safe to say that the NFL has a major problem. there will be guys that will waive their future rights to health for quick money, but how many and at what cost?

 

[Pearl309]

i dont know but i think it is safe to say that the NFL has a major problem. there will be guys that will waive their future rights to health for quick money, but how many and at what cost?

All of them.

 

[orangenirvana]

I love the NFL the way it is now, but I wouldn't stop watching if the league gravitated towards a sport that more closely resembles flag football. I love football for the chess-like strategy, schemes, athleticism, and pure competition involving the best football players in the world. None of those things would go away.

 

[Townie72]

"Said he can see the big 4 or 5 leagues leaving the NCAA. This is a business and the NCAA rules just get in the way. The NCAA will either have to bend to these leagues or become irrelevant."

If and when this occurs --- and I'd say it is probable it will --- you are going to see a rapid and PROFOUND separation of the "haves" from the "Have nots". The TV networks will have achieved its dream of a NCAA football structure that approaches that of the NFL (Fewer teams and much bigger games).

The NCAA is the only thing that keeps the smaller schools "in the game" giving them a share of the revenue and exposure. The NCAA has continually tried to level the playing field (e.g 85 total schollies). Freed from this restraint, the "Haves" will write the rules to suit themselves. Huge rosters at these schools will drain the talent from the "Have Nots". More money will flow to fewer schools (Both a bigger pie and fewer slices.)

 

[Noexcuse]

If Big 12 teams get picked off, I wouldn't be surprised to see them replaced by Louisville, Cinci, USF, maybe a couple of the BE newbies. ND would then likely need to make a decision about where they fit in.

 

[44PRIDE]

The NFL lawsuit bothers me much in the same way that lawsuits against the tobacco industry bothered me.

They knew/know the risks associated with smoking...but made a choice to smoke. Once they became ill, these smokers decide to sue the tobacco industry for "negligence".

The same holds true for these NFL players who chose to play this game. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that running full speed into another human being isn't good for your health.

What's next? Where does it end? NBA players suing the NBA for damage caused to their knees and backs?

 

[Crusty]

"Said he can see the big 4 or 5 leagues leaving the NCAA. This is a business and the NCAA rules just get in the way. The NCAA will either have to bend to these leagues or become irrelevant."

If and when this occurs --- and I'd say it is probable it will --- you are going to see a rapid and PROFOUND separation of the "haves" from the "Have nots". The TV networks will have achieved its dream of a NCAA football structure that approaches that of the NFL (Fewer teams and much bigger games).

The NCAA is the only thing that keeps the smaller schools "in the game" giving them a share of the revenue and exposure. The NCAA has continually tried to level the playing field (e.g 85 total schollies). Freed from this restraint, the "Haves" will write the rules to suit themselves. Huge rosters at these schools will drain the talent from the "Have Nots". More money will flow to fewer schools (Both a bigger pie and fewer slices.)

IMO I think you have it mostly correct except Congressmen and Senators did not all go to those schools and there is no anti-trust exemption for college football. If they overreach the Feds will slap them down. I am sure they know this and will not cross the line.

 

[orangenirvana]

The NFL lawsuit bothers me much in the same way that lawsuits against the tobacco industry bothered me.

They knew/know the risks associated with smoking...but made a choice to smoke. Once they became ill, these smokers decide to sue the tobacco industry for "negligence".

The same holds true for these NFL players who chose to play this game. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that running full speed into another human being isn't good for your health.

What's next? Where does it end? NBA players suing the NBA for damage caused to their knees and backs?

I don't blame the "victims" who do the suing...even though I think they're all dbags (for the most part).

I blame the system ie judges who reward their stupidity and allow this to continue to occur. If humans see free money, the vast majority are going to do whatever they can to grab it.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

The NFL Needs to get rid of all the steroids first, some of the legal supplements as well, should not be. That would be a great start and then keep going, weight limits, etc Look at the size of guys today versus 25 years ago and then the speed that some of these 300 pounders are moving at. Lots of guys cheating out there

 

[kingottoiii]

LOL @Boise. The P12 wouldn't take OU and Okie St. THATS OU AND OKIE ST. Yet they are going to take Boise?

 

[orangenirvana]

The NFL Needs to get rid of all the steroids first, some of the legal supplements as well, should not be. That would be a great start and then keep going, weight limits, etc Look at the size of guys today versus 25 years ago and then the speed that some of these 300 pounders are moving at. Lots of guys cheating out there

I don't think steroids are that big a deal in the NFL. These guys are just freaks of nature, huge from high school for the most part. I think most of the steroid use you would see in the league is more so for the purpose of healing injuries quicker and prolonging careers. If that's cheating then okay, put a stop to it, but it's not for the sole porpose of creating monsters like we saw in baseball.

Rarely in football do you see a skinny kid miraculously develop into a muscle-bound freak with gigantic head and a 4.4 40 (Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, Luis Gonzalez, etc). There are a few exceptions, of course, but they rarely if ever last. The injuries become too much (Shawne Merriman).

Aaron Maybin, for instance, juiced like crazy (allegedly) before the 2009 NFL combine and was able to get over 250. The Bills took the bait and since then he hasn't been able to reach 230. I think the fact that Maybust errr Maybin hasn't bulked up since that combine shows that the NFL has steroids under control more so than people would think.

 

[SUinNYC]

LOL @Boise. The P12 wouldn't take OU and Okie St. THATS OU AND OKIE ST. Yet they are going to take Boise?

Surprised me too. Never heard that one before. But that was this guy's opinion.

 

[Townie72]

IMO I think you have it mostly correct except Congressmen and Senators did not all go to those schools and there is no anti-trust exemption for college football. If they overreach the Feds will slap them down. I am sure they know this and will not cross the line.

You have much, much more faith in the power and will of Congress and the Federal Government than I do. If put to a vote by plebiscite I'd bet the voting public would like a new NFL-like structure.

To get a sense of just how motivated the big schools are going to be, consider the little dust-off we just witnessed at UVA. It shows just how hungry for new sources of money these schools are. The head of the UVA board --- a real business person --- led a campaign to replace the President because the plan that UVA was pursuing to address the current and future financial "crisis" was too gradual. Now the board member was forced to back off when so many of those that would be affected by radical change raised Holy Hell.

American colleges and universities have been on an uncontrolled spending spree and they don't want to stop. They have raised tuition levels, squeezed donors and pleaded with Government to the maximum extent they can.

They need more money to keep from making painful cuts. (or cuts which they consider "painful")

Let's see. Where can they go to get more money?

 

[HtownOrange]

He covers college sports for them. Speaks to coaches, ADs and league officials regularly. Has no dog in the fight, so to speak, just gave me his gut on the sports landscape. This stuff is merely his opinion based on the conversations he has had. Off the record. Nothing ground breaking, but I found it interesting nonetheless. Much of this corroborates what my brother in law at ESPN tells me.

Couple of nuggets:

He thinks WVU is in trouble with football recruiting (we've been saying that on this board for a while, but it was good to hear it from someone else). Can't sell a kid from the east coast on playing in Lubbock, TX. No cache. Thinks that program's best days are behind it.

Said he can see the big 4 or 5 leagues leaving the NCAA. This is a business and the NCAA rules just get in the way. The NCAA will either have to bend to these leagues or become irrelevant.

Geographically, the BIG XII is screwed. Again, not news, but said it is the most vulnerable league. B1G, PAC, ACC and SEC all make sense. He thinks PAC-12 is going after Boise and 3 BIG XII schools (he guessed Kansas and Texas--one hoops, one football and one other he wouldn't speculate on). Thought it would happen in the next five to ten years.

One of the big unspoken things that drives realignment is student body and alumni base. We heard a little bit about it with FSU, but said it was a big factor for Colorado moving. A large percentage of CU's students come from California.

At the end of our conversation, he brought up the NFL injury lawsuits. Said all this college stuff could be moot (since football drives it). His words "The NFL as we know it may not exist in a decade." Said the litigation could bankrupt the league (1000's of former players suing for $100's of millions) or make the game unrecognizable (different field configuration and rules). Said "Who wants to watch flag football? Because that's what it could be." I hope he was just exaggerating because of the beer. Because I wouldn't want to live in that world.

Overall I agree with much that was said, even the Big 12 being geographically screwed. However, the thought that the Pac 12 would take Boise State over Oklahoma and Oklahoma State is, well, quite humorous. Oklahoma has history, tradition, success, fanbase, national following; BSU has a few good years, some trick plays and a blue field. Academically, OU is miles ahead of BSU and they are improving their academics and research (a big issue to the Pac 12). Okie State lags behind OU but most people would agree that they are better than BSU academically and athletically overall.

Kansas makes sense as a Pac 12 add as a hoops school with decent academics.

Like the practical comment about selling a kid on playing in Lubbock. That's a hard enough sell here in Texas, let alone an eastern state.

 

[44PRIDE]

He thinks WVU is in trouble with football recruiting (we've been saying that on this board for a while, but it was good to hear it from someone else). Can't sell a kid from the east coast on playing in Lubbock, TX. No cache. Thinks that program's best days are behind it.

I'm extremely curious to see how this plays out for WVU once the shine of expansion has worn off and the realities of travel set in. With no major airport within 100 miles of campus, travel could get quite ugly for them.

But its not as if WVU had a real choice in all of this. The SEC said no...the ACC said no...the B1G said no. Their only option for a seat at the big boy table was the B12.

 

[All4SU]

BSU has a few good years, some trick plays and a blue field.

I don't think USC will ever play on a blue field.

 

[All4SU]

I'm extremely curious to see how this plays out for WVU once the shine of expansion has worn off and the realities of travel set in. With no major airport within 100 miles of campus, travel could get quite ugly for them.

But its not as if WVU had a real choice in all of this. The SEC said no...the ACC said no...the B1G said no. Their only option for a seat at the big boy table was the B12.

AGree that WVU was stuck. They knew the BE was going down, and had to jump someplace. I still wonder if they had stuck it out for a couple of years -- and won the BE a couple more times -- if they might not have helped their cause to possibly get an SEC invite. No way to know, obviously.

As it is now, I don't think they can win the B12, their recruiting may take a dive, and the SEC is never going to come calling.

 

[SUinNYC]

Overall I agree with much that was said, even the Big 12 being geographically screwed. However, the thought that the Pac 12 would take Boise State over Oklahoma and Oklahoma State is, well, quite humorous. Oklahoma has history, tradition, success, fanbase, national following; BSU has a few good years, some trick plays and a blue field. Academically, OU is miles ahead of BSU and they are improving their academics and research (a big issue to the Pac 12). Okie State lags behind OU but most people would agree that they are better than BSU academically and athletically overall.

Kansas makes sense as a Pac 12 add as a hoops school with decent academics.

Like the practical comment about selling a kid on playing in Lubbock. That's a hard enough sell here in Texas, let alone an eastern state.

Agree with you on OU vs. Boise. But when he said it, I didn't get the sense he was talking about one or the other. He had just been talking about the California market and Boise football is a bigger commodity there than it is out east. Their academics are awful though. But then again so are Wash St. and Oregon St--at least that's my understanding.

 

[billsin01]

The NFL lawsuit bothers me much in the same way that lawsuits against the tobacco industry bothered me.

They knew/know the risks associated with smoking...but made a choice to smoke. Once they became ill, these smokers decide to sue the tobacco industry for "negligence".

The same holds true for these NFL players who chose to play this game. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that running full speed into another human being isn't good for your health.

What's next? Where does it end? NBA players suing the NBA for damage caused to their knees and backs?

I don't know -- the NFL billed itself as a tough guy league and has a documented history of essentially coercing guys to play through pain/injuries. I know that it doesn't take a ton of brains to figure out it's a risky sport to play but I very much doubt anyone in the league had any idea quite how many traumatic brain injuries would result from the physical abuse. Bad knees, horrible backs, crippling arthritis, etc. I get. But early-onset dementia and a rash of suicides due to mental illness? That is pretty tragic.

 

[billsin01]

I don't blame the "victims" who do the suing...even though I think they're all dbags (for the most part).

I blame the system ie judges who reward their stupidity and allow this to continue to occur. If humans see free money, the vast majority are going to do whatever they can to grab it.

I don't know exactly where I stand on the lawsuits per se, but dementia and severe clinical depression are issues I never thought about when I was making fun of Mark Kelso's double-helmet in the early 90s. I think it's unfair to suggest there aren't a large number of true victims of a culture that celebrated the idea of doing completely stupid things (i.e. continuing to play through concussions and knee injuries, etc.). Is that the NFL's fault? I don't know. But those guys are truly victims, IMO.

 

[ImperialOrange]

I love football for the chess-like strategy, schemes, athleticism, and pure competition involving the best football players in the world. None of those things would go away.

Awesome post and exactly why I watch soccer as well.

I think the NFL could survive even if it was a bit less brutal. If you want gladiator style entertainment now, you can just tune into MMA.

 

[SU2NASA]

There is a negative eleventy-billion percent chance that Boise goes to the Pac-12.

 

[billsin01]

I'm extremely curious to see how this plays out for WVU once the shine of expansion has worn off and the realities of travel set in. With no major airport within 100 miles of campus, travel could get quite ugly for them.

But its not as if WVU had a real choice in all of this. The SEC said no...the ACC said no...the B1G said no. Their only option for a seat at the big boy table was the B12.

I agree -- it will be very interesting to see how it plays out. I still don't really get why the SEC said no. But if I had to predict, I'd guess they land on their feet somewhere. I mean, I know academics are an issue, I guess, but a good football and a good basketball program with rabid fan support has to be of interest to a solid conference somewhere, right? I have no real knowledge of all this but my guess is once people realize the nightmare of the travel they've all decided to incur and the networks realize the fallacy of universities driving markets and they figure out how to better market their primetime shows in the DVR era, teams will end up in smaller, more manageable regional conferences again and WVU will be OK. Regardless, it will be interesting.