NCAA reorg imminent

[Essexfenwick]

If the money sport athletes eventually get the same rights as labor in the US economy as a whole (and then we're talking right-to-work vs right-to-organize states of course) could we see some ambitious money men just try enticing them into developmental leagues for the pros, splitting off from the school-based system to a more euro model?
And if so, how long before some alums are indicted for (attempted?) murder of the pro leagues' organizers?

Nfl is happy with college being the minor league and the players are getting the best coaching, facilities, strength training and nutrition on top of being paid. The combo of large market/alumni schools and minor league football all day Saturday is the most lucrative and sustainable system. The question is if the top players have to keep pretending they are getting a college education.

[ggait]

There are almost 900 college football teams if you count all the various divisions. The breadth and depth of that expansive minor league network is pretty staggering. Just think of how much the infrastructure and systems for that would cost to replicate.

So the nfl would be beyond insane to ever try to challenge or undermine that system. Works well for the schools and work very well for the nfl.

[Farfromgeneva]

D3 doesn’t function in any way shape or form like a minor league system. It’s just not the case. So that’s about 250 programs you can drop off. The Ali Marpet anomaly isn’t likely to change. You get a RB from Coe, London Fletcher, Pierre Garçon about once a decade and a couple of practice squad kids here and there but you compare infrastructure and related it’s like saying a little league field in Danville VA is infrastructure for the MLB.

[Typical Lax Dad]

If the money sport athletes eventually get the same rights as labor in the US economy as a whole (and then we're talking right-to-work vs right-to-organize states of course) could we see some ambitious money men just try enticing them into developmental leagues for the pros, splitting off from the school-based system to a more euro model?
And if so, how long before some alums are indicted for (attempted?) murder of the pro leagues' organizers?

Nfl is happy with college being the minor league and the players are getting the best coaching, facilities, strength training and nutrition on top of being paid. The combo of large market/alumni schools and minor league football all day Saturday is the most lucrative and sustainable system. The question is if the top players have to keep pretending they are getting a college education.

Is a silly system. I am wondering if athletes will just “attend school” online. Flying across country for midweek games seems kind of silly.

[ggait]

Just another annoying pettifog from ffg.

FYI, there’s about 80 d2 and d3 players on nfl rosters each season. Tyreek Hill says hi.

And of course lower football levels are transfer sources for the higher levels. Jucos are a major part of the system.

Not many guys make it to the bigs from the lowest minor leagues tiers. But those tiers still exist.

Bottom line and the point your flyspeck does not address, is that it is beyond absurd to think that nfl would want to challenge college football in any meaningful way. College football, and also hs football, is great for the nfl.

[Farfromgeneva]

Just another annoying pettifog from ffg.

FYI, there’s about 80 d2 and d3 players on nfl rosters each season. Tyreek Hill says hi.

And of course lower football levels are transfer sources for the higher levels. Jucos are a major part of the system.

Not many guys make it to the bigs from the lowest minor leagues tiers. But those tiers still exist.

Bottom line and the point your flyspeck does not address, is that it is beyond absurd to think that nfl would want to challenge college football in any meaningful way. College football, and also hs football, is great for the nfl.

Or analysis that uses data poorly often to get one over.

It doesn’t have to be the NFL killing the college higher ed Athletics system. It likely happens from other pressure points.

Utterly stupid analysis and poor data used to make an argument that’s also way off base about the future of the NCAA. Having played D3 football and being close to the Marpet family and having numerous former teammates who are D3 HCs whi have scout show up a their games and talk to them, I’ll take that I know more about D3 to NFL than you ever will.

Data used poorly or with garbage analysis is worthless. Using all college athletes is a red herring and a argument made to en a winner but intellectually bankrupt.

And you combined D2 to make your point which means you have no understanding of any of this. Just abstraction on your part. If you’re any o can connect you offline with Pat at D3Sports.com which is older than LP. He can explain it to you.

You are stupidly addressing a threat brought up by Peter brown. You sucked to responding to that idiot.

[Dip&Dunk]

I really tried hard to understand that last post. I failed.

[pcowlax]

That post read like the great Friends episode where Joey need to write something and sound smart so he puts pretty much every word through a thesaurus and end up sounding like a fool (and signs it Baby Kangaroo Tribiani). Of course the NFL wants no part of creating a minor league system. It would indeed require well over a hundred teams to replicate the opportunities for evaluation they have now, with kids playing for years and years in the minors (as these would be high schoolers entering this and this isn’t baseball, you can’t going high school to NFL in 2 years). They would massively degrade the quality of their product, incur huge cost and significantly reduce interest and ratings in football (compare D1 ratings to XFL/USFL). Insane.

[44WeWantMore]

I really tried hard to understand that last post. I failed.

Stewardess, I speak ffg.

Short version: D-III football is overwhelmingly made up of true amateurs, essentially none of whom expect to make the NFL. And D-III football is so different from Power-5 football, it is almost a separate sport.

[My .02, based on personal observations from my days]: Not a single player on the JHU football team thought he was in some kind of NFL farm system.
Even in D-I, the programs I am most familiar with (USNA, the Ivies, and Duke), the vast majority were pleased to be able to attend otherwise unobtainable schools. Maybe the best player on their team would get an NFL tryout, and a generational talent would have a meaningful NFL career, but I agree with ffg that to call even all of D-I an NFL farm system is to paint with an overbroad brush.

[ggait]

Go back and read my post.

I never said D3 was the primary feeder for the NFL. Duh.

What I DID say is that there is a vast vast installed nation-wide network of college football. Which the colleges are happy to maintain at their own expense for their own reasons. So that the NFL would never ever ever want that to go away. Which was the question being asked in the post I was responding to below.

And then we get some weird ffg rant about his D3 playing days and a bunch of people known only to ffg. Odd.



If the money sport athletes eventually get the same rights as labor in the US economy as a whole (and then we're talking right-to-work vs right-to-organize states of course) could we see some ambitious money men just try enticing them into developmental leagues for the pros, splitting off from the school-based system to a more euro model?
And if so, how long before some alums are indicted for (attempted?) murder of the pro leagues' organizers?

[Can Opener]

On second thought, Clemson doesn’t want the “success incentive” structure in the ACC after all.

[Farfromgeneva]

I really tried hard to understand that last post. I failed.

Stewardess, I speak ffg.

Short version: D-III football is overwhelmingly made up of true amateurs, essentially none of whom expect to make the NFL. And D-III football is so different from Power-5 football, it is almost a separate sport.

[My .02, based on personal observations from my days]: Not a single player on the JHU football team thought he was in some kind of NFL farm system.
Even in D-I, the programs I am most familiar with (USNA, the Ivies, and Duke), the vast majority were pleased to be able to attend otherwise unobtainable schools. Maybe the best player on their team would get an NFL tryout, and a generational talent would have a meaningful NFL career, but I agree with ffg that to call even all of D-I an NFL farm system is to paint with an overbroad brush.

LP or FL there’s always a Hop translator. Do you help OCanada too by chance?

Yes using such a large universe to make a point is absolute nonsense.

[Farfromgeneva]

Go back and read my post.

I never said D3 was the primary feeder for the NFL. Duh.

What I DID say is that there is a vast vast installed nation-wide network of college football. Which the colleges are happy to maintain at their own expense for their own reasons. So that the NFL would never ever ever want that to go away. Which was the question being asked in the post I was responding to below.

And then we get some weird ffg rant about his D3 playing days and a bunch of people known only to ffg. Odd.



If the money sport athletes eventually get the same rights as labor in the US economy as a whole (and then we're talking right-to-work vs right-to-organize states of course) could we see some ambitious money men just try enticing them into developmental leagues for the pros, splitting off from the school-based system to a more euro model?
And if so, how long before some alums are indicted for (attempted?) murder of the pro leagues' organizers?

Only Peter Brown EssexFenwick Elon Rockefeller boy made the statement and believes the NFL would shut the system which is dumb-no one worse believes that. The system will eat itself.

Ali Marpet is the highest D3 draft pick ever who wins a Suoer Bowl with Tom Brady starting for the Bucs his entire career until retiring two years ago out of concerns form his second concussions walking away from gtd money in his second deal and full pension. He went too Hobart and was an all pro. So talking about understanding the NFL and not knowing an all pro starter who was mentioned numerous times as a D3 player in the super bowl recently should be noticeable. Same for Garçon and Fletcher who are the other two most decorated NFL from D3 guys in a number of decades since Ken Anderson came form Augusta. Fred jackson from Coe had a few good years w Buffalo. To speak about understanding the NFL in abstract and not knowing anything about the D3 players who played in the NFL speaks volumes. And you took the first shot after making a dumb argument that was directed at a stupid instigating poster.

It’s these specious arguments framed widely that are just stupid nonsense that domain experts will pick a paper in five seconds.

You also doubled down on “theres 80 D2 and D3 players in the NFL” to make it sound like you were right and win while sneaking D2 in. You know you wanted to be right and tired hard today take turd.

[ggait]

There’s about 600 teams including fbs, fcs, d2 and juco.

Bless me father for my most grievious fault of mentioning the existence of about 300 d3 college teams. Although that’s true, I don’t know what I was thinking. I will try to not sin again.

[MDlaxfan76]

My first observation is that folks seem to be talking past one another.

Sounds like there's widespread agreement that it makes little to no sense that the NFL would itself try to create a semi-pro feeder league instead of the current college based system.

Probably also agreement that the current college-based system is already, in part, a semi-pro system and may well continue to evolve toward professional status, though in differing levels. And that this will further align 'haves' and 'have-nots'. Some schools will choose to align with big-money 'opportunity', others will continue to choose to not do so.

Not much incentive for the NFL to interfere, nor to close out various ways athletes can reach the NFL. They'll continue to select from and benefit from wherever the best players emerge.

Or do I have this wrong?

If I'm correct, will the squeeze will be for the colleges in the middle, those which thought they were part of the 'money' realm, but may find it impossible to keep up? Or will there simply be a middle tier where expectations aren't nearly the same as the big money schools? But still viable economically?

And will the stresses so divide the NCAA as to make it irrelevant for the big money schools?
And, if so, how would the NCAA address other sports at those schools?

I don't follow this at all closely so forgive any naïveté !

[Farfromgeneva]

There’s about 600 teams including fbs, fcs, d2 and juco.

Bless me father for my most grievious fault of mentioning the existence of about 300 d3 college teams. Although that’s true, I don’t know what I was thinking. I will try to not sin again.

When you try to slam dunk on people and improperly frame arguments, and still are by the way wanting to look good, it just creates a framework of nonsense underpinning everything else. Lacks an understanding of where the NFL is getting the talent from or who the talent is as well as their relationship to the institutions of higher education they represent.

Not to mention getting sucked I stupidly took a dumb comment form another known Bs artist poster.

Where abstraction meets reality.

[Farfromgeneva]

My first observation is that folks seem to be talking past one another.

Sounds like there's widespread agreement that it makes little to no sense that the NFL would itself try to create a semi-pro feeder league instead of the current college based system.

Probably also agreement that the current college-based system is already, in part, a semi-pro system and may well continue to evolve toward professional status, though in differing levels. And that this will further align 'haves' and 'have-nots'. Some schools will choose to align with big-money 'opportunity', others will continue to choose to not do so.

Not much incentive for the NFL to interfere, nor to close out various ways athletes can reach the NFL. They'll continue to select from and benefit from wherever the best players emerge.

Or do I have this wrong?

If I'm correct, will the squeeze will be for the colleges in the middle, those which thought they were part of the 'money' realm, but may find it impossible to keep up? Or will there simply be a middle tier where expectations aren't nearly the same as the big money schools? But still viable economically?

And will the stresses so divide the NCAA as to make it irrelevant for the big money schools?
And, if so, how would the NCAA address other sports at those schools?

I don't follow this at all closely so forgive any naïveté !

NCAA is done with respect to major Football. Exists in name only at this stage. Just a matter of how the separation occurs over the next decade or so.

Of course the NFL isn’t going to step up to pay for this (though the NBA hs invested developmental leagues so never say never if some of that college TV money can be redirected to subsidize it through the NFLs hands.

The only question is how and when the colleges deal with the separation of football from them and the NCAA system. The issue is the lower and middle class is either needed as schedule filler and therefor has value they can extract grudgingly from the big money football schools or the big money football programs decide they need a closed system excluding the rest.

[Farfromgeneva]

My first observation is that folks seem to be talking past one another.

Sounds like there's widespread agreement that it makes little to no sense that the NFL would itself try to create a semi-pro feeder league instead of the current college based system.

Probably also agreement that the current college-based system is already, in part, a semi-pro system and may well continue to evolve toward professional status, though in differing levels. And that this will further align 'haves' and 'have-nots'. Some schools will choose to align with big-money 'opportunity', others will continue to choose to not do so.

Not much incentive for the NFL to interfere, nor to close out various ways athletes can reach the NFL. They'll continue to select from and benefit from wherever the best players emerge.

Or do I have this wrong?

If I'm correct, will the squeeze will be for the colleges in the middle, those which thought they were part of the 'money' realm, but may find it impossible to keep up? Or will there simply be a middle tier where expectations aren't nearly the same as the big money schools? But still viable economically?

And will the stresses so divide the NCAA as to make it irrelevant for the big money schools?
And, if so, how would the NCAA address other sports at those schools?

I don't follow this at all closely so forgive any naïveté !

The deal is if you don’t know the difference in infrastructure between Kutztown, St Thomas Mn, UMHB (TX) or Mt Union vs LSU or Neyland or State College and pretend they’re the same there’s no getting past that.

Even including D2 80 players on NFL rosters is roughly 1% but yeah let’s include all that infrastructure to support an argument. It’s nonsense.

[Farfromgeneva]

Disney-Charter fight could be the start of the TV bundle breaking

Data: American Television Alliance; Chart: Axios Visuals
The financial dispute between Disney and Charter highlights the growing tensions between content providers and cable and satellite operators as cord-cutting threatens to permanently unravel the cable TV business.

Why it matters: If this fight isn't resolved, the entire business model for the traditional cable TV industry could be on the verge of collapsing.

Driving the news: Disney channels, including ABC, ESPN and FX, have been blacked out since Thursday for Charter's Spectrum cable customers after the two failed a reach a new carriage agreement.

During an investor call on Friday, Charter said it was expecting to pay Disney more than $2.2 billion for the right to carry its content for the year, but given how much the cable ecosystem is changing, renewing a traditional distribution deal in line with Disney's current offer "would ignore the realities of today's video business and accelerate its decline."
Charter argued that Disney's requests, which included things like "higher license fees" and "less packaging flexibility," continue to "ignore the realities of a shifting marketplace."

Disney argued that losing ESPN "is a major issue for consumers since it's one of the most popular channels." It said Charter's demand to distribute ESPN's streaming services for free "does not make economic sense."

What's happening: Disney on Monday began messaging to Spectrum customers that if they were frustrated with losing access to Disney programming, they could sign up for Disney's digital live-TV offering, Hulu with Live TV, as well as any other live-TV streaming services like DIRECTV Stream, YouTube TV, Sling and Fubo

Disney has already begun to pull in its biggest personalities, such as ESPN's Stephen A. Smith, to echo its message directly to consumers.
The big picture: Rather than bash Disney for asking for too much money, Charter told its investors it needs to either rethink the cable bundle or get out of that business entirely.

The cable giant essentially said that the Disney dispute is emblematic of the entire video ecosystem being "broken."
"This is not a typical carriage dispute," Charter said. "It is significant for Charter, and we think it is even more significant for programmers and the broader video ecosystem."
Charter is the country's second largest cable TV operator with nearly 15 million subscribers, second only to Comcast. Its footprint is heavily weighted toward the Los Angeles and New York City area markets.
Be smart: Channel blackouts have become more frequent in recent years, as TV companies push to charge more for their content than cable and satellite providers want to pay.

Since 2015, TV networks have more than doubled the amount of money they've charged cable companies for distributing their programming, despite the fact that pay-TV subscriptions have declined by more than 40%, according to data from S&P Global and MoffettNathanson.
Between the lines: ESPN's bevy of live sports rights has made it the most expensive cable channel by far. But while sports still drive big viewership, they no longer hold the bundle together as well as they once did.

ESPN has been preparing for the inevitable collapse of the cable bundle by building its own stand-alone streaming app, ESPN+. It also plans to break out ESPN into a separate streaming service.
Disney is in the middle of looking for a strategic partner for ESPN to help with distribution of its forthcoming direct-to-consumer offering.
What's next: It's possible that the two sides could still come to an agreement. Sports Business Journal's John Ourand reports that Charter president and CEO Chris Winfrey and Disney CEO Bob Iger have been in contact over the weekend.

[Essexfenwick]

The SEC and B1G are second only to nfl level content. Doesn’t matter what platform is paying … it’s billions of dollars.