Players getting paid isn't going to kill college sports... | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Players getting paid isn't going to kill college sports...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Probably everything you have ever used or consumed. 200,000 companies in the US are private. Don’t like it, don’t watch Shark Tank.

Apple was backed by venture. Google was. Google has a venture capital arm to invest in small companies.

Don’t equate all PE to the Blackstones and KKRs of the world who buy massive companies, lever them up, and then sell them to a static or IPO the damn thing.

PE is most likely responsible for getting your favorite brand into the store you bought it at (Harry’s Razors, etc)

My god.
Are we not acknowledging the difference between privately owned companies and private equity firms?

I took a company public. It's a transition. But the company didn't change in negative ways for customers until it was acquired by a PE firm.
 
Probably everything you have ever used or consumed. 200,000 companies in the US are private. Don’t like it, don’t watch Shark Tank.

Apple was backed by venture. Google was. Google has a venture capital arm to invest in small companies.

Don’t equate all PE to the Blackstones and KKRs of the world who buy massive companies, lever them up, and then sell them to a static or IPO the damn thing.

PE is most likely responsible for getting your favorite brand into the store you bought it at (Harry’s Razors, etc)

My god.
You’re confusing things here. Harry’s founders raised money and were involved in fundraising. The same thing for shark tank. Private equity to me is leadership that comes in and kicks out the original founders. They always suck.
 
Don’t equate all PE to the Blackstones and KKRs of the world who buy massive companies, lever them up, and then sell them to a static or IPO the damn thing.
Hard to see what PE is doing to English soccer and not be concerned here. "Take everything that makes it fun and unique and change it to enhance profits."
 
Last edited:
You’re confusing things here. Harry’s founders raised money and were involved in fundraising. The same thing for shark tank. Private equity to me is leadership that comes in and kicks out the original founders. They always suck.

Not really. You are basically saying you don’t like buyout vs growth.
 
Yes, I'm sure SU would be the only school affected by this transgression.
Didn't say they would but the only reason anyone on this board cares is because we fear SU being a non-player.
 
Is making things worse actually good? My column:
When do you have your bad meal at Red Lobster? Because the thing had been private for the last 10 years.
 
You’re confusing things here. Harry’s founders raised money and were involved in fundraising. The same thing for shark tank. Private equity to me is leadership that comes in and kicks out the original founders. They always suck.
Fun fact: we invested in and incubated Harry's back in 2012. PE did get involved and they have been fantastic. Stay tuned.

Like an sport or profession, there are good and bad. We've seen PE maker some "oof" decisions the same way I've gotten had advice from reputable doctors.

I get people can have a closed view off of little knowledge. But I got news for you: get used to private equity because they will become a bigger part of NBA and NFL ownership, and likely be involved in College Football 2.0 as the NCAA evolves from incompetency to full irrelevancy.
 
Fun fact: we invested in and incubated Harry's back in 2012. PE did get involved and they have been fantastic. Stay tuned.

Like an sport or profession, there are good and bad. We've seen PE maker some "oof" decisions the same way I've gotten had advice from reputable doctors.

I get people can have a closed view off of little knowledge. But I got news for you: get used to private equity because they will become a bigger part of NBA and NFL ownership, and likely be involved in College Football 2.0 as the NCAA evolves from incompetency to full irrelevancy.
I watch shark tank. Harry’s isn’t the example you think it is.

It will be terrible for consumers. Guaranteed. And way to be an a$$.
 
I watch shark tank. Harry’s isn’t the example you think it is.

It will be terrible for consumers. Guaranteed. And way to be an a$$.
Why is he an a$$? Because his firm was an early stage investor in Harry’s?????
 

When a player leaves, during the season​

It really hurts his/her teammates which, in my view, is very selfish and immature!
 
I get people can have a closed view off of little knowledge. But I got news for you: get used to private equity because they will become a bigger part of NBA and NFL ownership, and likely be involved in College Football 2.0 as the NCAA evolves from incompetency to full irrelevancy.
"Get used to the thing you have an emotional attachment to being destroyed because someone who has a lot more money than you wants to make even more money." Quite the rallying cry.
 
Didn't say they would but the only reason anyone on this board cares is because we fear SU being a non-player.
So my question is, considering the number of schools that would be potential " non-players" that have very much been relevant over the years, how much would college sports be affected overall in popularity?
 
PE won't kill college football.

It might, however, kill Syracuse football.

Yes and No. If one wants to still believe that SU is a player on the national level, it would kill that. But if one is being honest SU was never a national player in FB.

For me, part of the allure of college football are the traditions, the Bowl games, the regional rivalries, and road trips. The last point being very unique to American sports. You don't see visitors sections really outside of soccer.

These above allure has dying off in the Super Conference and max profit era. If the end result of this is a return to an actual college feel for SU FB, I am all for it.

Having the ability to win the conference every year sounds good to me. Having a round robin schedule where you play your entire conference sounds good to me. Having less games on TV which means shorter games and no 3:10 commercial breaks sounds good to me. Having the ability to easily drive to road games sounds good to me. I care about SU FB, and being there in person. That doesn't change even if we are DIII.

There are 13 other FBS programs within 300 miles of SU. Penn State would have a seat at the big boy table. If we are "stuck" playing 10 of the other 12 a year, plus one destination road game I will be perfectly happy.

Potential destination left behinds that peak my interest:
UNLV, Stanford, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Tulane, FAU, UCF, USF

Within 300 miles club:
BC, UConn, Army, Buffalo, Rutgers, Temple, Pitt, Delaware, Maryland, Navy, West Virginia, Akron

I would be fine playing 12 teams from the above and potentially playing in a Bowl against a team from a different region than ours.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
170,601
Messages
4,900,800
Members
6,004
Latest member
fsaracene

Online statistics

Members online
147
Guests online
1,210
Total visitors
1,357


...
Top Bottom