Page 2 of 3
Re: Well........
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:23 pm
by Spence
I always like G.G.Gee. My kids got their picture with him as the second O in O-H-I-O. It is one of my favorite pictures. But he also knew how much money that football brought in to Ohio State and he didn't want to upset that Apple cart.
Re: Well........
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:12 pm
by Mountainman
The presidents, knew there were risks and consequences, but chose to take the money and accept the risks ...... anyway, I read where Jim Delany made some comments today about how the CFP can be ‘painful and damaging’ for a league to be left out of the playoff. He also says how surprised he was about how important the ‘eye-test’ has become in selecting the playoff field.
Re: Well........
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:39 pm
by Spence
He is right, though I hate to agree with Delaney about anything, and the eye test is the most subjective of all ways they judge teams.
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 12:08 am
by Mountainman
Delaney was a tough customer, but he was in a tough environment up against what the SEC and ACC were doing........ and he beat them at their own game.
https://es.pn/2r9NhCC
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:02 am
by Spence
I'm not sure he beat them. He did forge a better television deal. The ACC could have a lot better deal in place if Notre Dame would join in football. North Carolina is getting better, but the ACC needs Florida State and Miami to join Clemson as conference leaders. It would also help them tremendously if Virginia Tech would re-enter the fray. The SEC model is good for them. They had two really good teams this year and five good to middling teams and they rule the world. The PAC-12 desperately needs USC and UCLA to be good again. USC's recruiting class was pathetic for them and they lost a load of prospects to eastern teams. People blame it on late TV times. It isn't that as much as it is them getting snubbed constantly in the playoffs. The PAC 12 has almost been rendered inconsequential in major college football. Had the B10 not made the deal they made with Fox and not brought in Rutgers and Maryland, the same thing could have happened to them. As bad as those schools have been competitively, them along with bringing Penn State in earlier has strengthen the B1G's television footprint and made it a ratings giant.
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 12:47 pm
by Mountainman
Yep he did, and at that time TV’s were what it was all about as that’s where the money was and is still today.... Delaney saw what was going on and went out and got the TV markets in New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia (which he already had in his pocket with Penn State), and the Baltimore/Washington DC Metroplex, and that’s one hell of a bunch of TV’s. It was a brilliant move and executed perfectly. It took a guy like Delaney has shown himself to be to pull it off.
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:12 pm
by Spence
Yeah, he did alright on the money side. I don't know why he got involved with this playoff model. There is a war going on between Disney and Fox and the mouse is winning the product side right now and Fox is winning the greenback side. Fox is winning the ratings battle right now. We will see how long Disney can hang with the numbers they have been posting.
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 4:37 pm
by Mountainman
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 4:55 pm
by Spence
Yep, but I believe Delaney was for it initially. From what I see; the CFP has destroyed the PAC-12, and made every school not named Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Florida, Ohio State, Clemson, Florida State, Penn State, Michigan, Oklahoma, Texas, or Nebraska you basically aren't relevant. It is really starting to take a toll in recruiting. Especially on the west coast. The best players from California are leaving the region for school. That is a direct result of the PAC-12 not having much presence in the playoff. Unless they let the best players from all regions represent in the tournament, it will crash the whole system and CFB. I think we are in the early stages of that right now.
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:03 pm
by billybud
Spence wrote:So as long as the university allows it's staff and the rest of the student body to be dishonest and lacking in integrity then it is Ok? The NCAA has dinged student athletes for less than what UNC did.
And I know you are just interpreting the rule and not judging the ruling.
Yes Spence....when I issued a decision as a Administrative Law Judge..I had to find the facts and issue the decision based on found facts and points of rule, regulation, and law.
I might not agree with the rule, regulation, and law...but was bound by those parameters when I issued a decision.
When a Court of Appeals reviewed my decision, they reviewed whether it was properly basewd on found facts and points of law. If so...they affirmed the decision.
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:21 pm
by Mountainman
Spence wrote:Yep, but I believe Delaney was for it initially. From what I see; the CFP has destroyed the PAC-12, and made every school not named Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Florida, Ohio State, Clemson, Florida State, Penn State, Michigan, Oklahoma, Texas, or Nebraska you basically aren't relevant. It is really starting to take a toll in recruiting. Especially on the west coast. The best players from California are leaving the region for school. That is a direct result of the PAC-12 not having much presence in the playoff. Unless they let the best players from all regions represent in the tournament, it will crash the whole system and CFB. I think we are in the early stages of that right now.
Thus his surprise on the emphasis of the ‘eyeball test’....... probably didn’t dawn on Delany the selection criteria would End-up relying so heavily on one factor. Maybe Ole Jim didn’t put it together that TV is all about ‘eyeballs’, influence, entertainment and dollars.
.......and btw, Paul Finebaum said on his show that the day after Alabama lost to LSU thus season, Saban was out recruiting a 5 star quarterback from..... you guessed it, California.
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:08 pm
by billybud
USC is falling apart...with a recruit class ranked #76. USC may no longer a place where the best recruits want to play.
In 2018...The Oregon Ducks, Michigan Wolverines, Clemson Tigers, South Carolina Gamecocks, UCLA Bruins, Texas Longhorns, Washington Huskies, Arizona State Sun Devils, Stanford Cardinal, Oklahoma Sooners and USC Trojans have all signed at least one of the top 20 players in California.
When you see headlines like...
https://www.latimes.com/sports/highscho ... ut-of-stat
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:43 pm
by Spence
billybud wrote:Spence wrote:So as long as the university allows it's staff and the rest of the student body to be dishonest and lacking in integrity then it is Ok? The NCAA has dinged student athletes for less than what UNC did.
And I know you are just interpreting the rule and not judging the ruling.
Yes Spence....when I issued a decision as a Administrative Law Judge..I had to find the facts and issue the decision based on found facts and points of rule, regulation, and law.
I might not agree with the rule, regulation, and law...but was bound by those parameters when I issued a decision.
When a Court of Appeals reviewed my decision, they reviewed whether it was properly basewd on found facts and points of law. If so...they affirmed the decision.
Yes, I agree. My rub is that the NCAA changed the game after they found out how what they did to SMU and decided it was better to go after the kids and coaches rather than the institutions.
Re: Well........
Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:00 pm
by Mountainman
Spence wrote:billybud wrote:Spence wrote:So as long as the university allows it's staff and the rest of the student body to be dishonest and lacking in integrity then it is Ok? The NCAA has dinged student athletes for less than what UNC did.
And I know you are just interpreting the rule and not judging the ruling.
Yes Spence....when I issued a decision as a Administrative Law Judge..I had to find the facts and issue the decision based on found facts and points of rule, regulation, and law.
I might not agree with the rule, regulation, and law...but was bound by those parameters when I issued a decision.
When a Court of Appeals reviewed my decision, they reviewed whether it was properly basewd on found facts and points of law. If so...they affirmed the decision.
Yes, I agree. My rub is that the NCAA changed the game after they found out how what they did to SMU and decided it was better to go after the kids and coaches rather than the institutions.
BOOM!!!!!
Re: Well........
Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:49 am
by billybud
SMU was paying the kids...was a repeat offender...and the pay for play was organized and paid by the school...not an out of control booster...
BOOM....
Kind of slowed down school organized pay of athletes...
