How NCAA v. Oklahoma, ultimately, destroyed the PAC12

[daleko]

Mar 25, 2024 15:58:37 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Do you know of any sports league with 130 teams?

The most crooked one has 211. FIFA

[DrSchadenfreude]

Mar 25, 2024 15:58:37 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 24, 2024 21:13:44 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Horseshit, Harry.  It has, certainly, been a national sports league for most of the past century. Look at the geographic locations of NCAA championship teams by year, prior to the 21st century. There is surface similarity, but NCAA and college football has never been a sports league. Compare it to the NFL and you're looking at 2 different things. NFL has 32 teams, D1 football has 130. Do you know of any sports league with 130 teams?  NFL has paid labor, college football has fought tooth and nail that their game is played by "student athletes" who should not be paid. Scheduling is controlled by schools and conferences, not a league. And what sports league decides its champion by opinion polls, committees and has a set up with a non-affiliated entity, i.e. bowl games? None that I know of. There's differences between college and pro. Just that simple. 
What happened to the country?

Prior to the 21st century, national champions in college football came from all regions of the country-- the East, the Midwest, the Deep South, the West, the Pacific, etc.

But modern de-regulation of media contracts has resulted in gross 21st century imbalances in funding, media advertising, staffing, recruitment, etc. I get that you hate Oklahoma and Georgia, but NCAA lost the USSC case because they violated Federal law, specifically anti-trust legislation. Should the NCAA be made to follow the law, or not? 

Anyone who denies this is either ignorant, dishonest, or both. Love the decorum and courtesy. 

The heavily corporate-media-funded and media-promoted schools are rolling in enough dough in recent years to readily poach players and coaches from the rest of the country. 

How are schools receiving less television revenue supposed to retain and maintain top coaches and players under those conditions? 
It's the reason that high quality professional leagues have shared standards about funding and salary caps, etc.

Which just illustrates why college football isn't a sports league. Salary caps are for players. How do you have a salary cap when the NCAA and schools business model is based on not paying players? Remember, they are "student athletes"....a term BTW that was created out of thin air by the NCAA in a workers comp case....to specifically say players weren't employees. However, my guess the courts are going to change that...and when it does, things will really get interesting.

Nice dodge, Harry.   Salary caps for players has, obviously, been a non-issue for most of the 21st century-- until very recently.

But the lop-sided history of 21st century college football finance is glaringly obvious.  The same handful of heavily-bankrolled schools compete for the title every year nowadays.

In reality, one of the biggest issues undermining some semblance of regional parity in American college football are the HUGE discrepancies in coaches' salaries.

And the coach-poaching enabled by monopolistic media contracts (and $$$) plays a major role in undermining programs and player recruitment at universities who aren't getting the big media bucks.

In any case, it's a waste of time to argue with a sociopath about issues of ethics and fairness, or laissez faire capitalism vs. utilitarianism.

It's like trying to discuss Shakespeare with a rooster.

[AlaCowboy]

Nie der hut the narcissistic sociopath said:

In reality, one of the biggest issues undermining some semblance of regional parity in American college football are the HUGE discrepancies in coaches' salaries.

And the coach-poaching enabled by monopolistic media contracts (and $$$) plays a major role in undermining programs and player recruitment at universities who aren't getting the big media bucks.

In any case, it's a waste of time to argue with a sociopath about issues of ethics and fairness, or laissez faire capitalism vs. utilitarianism.

In a capitalist society, top corporate officials make top salaries. The Denver Dolt thinks the coach at the least successful school should get the same salary as the coach at the most successful school. Imagine his sorrow at finding out Deion Sanders makes $5.5M a year at Colorado, while Ball State head coach Mike Neu makes $680,000. Shouldn't Deion take a salary cut? Send some cash to Mike Neu?
Just think of Colorado poaching Coach Sanders from little Jackson State in Mississippi. Nie der hut should be outrageous Colorado would do such a thing! Colorado and Nie der hut have no ethics.

[oujour76]

Mar 25, 2024 18:11:02 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Mar 25, 2024 15:58:37 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Which just illustrates why college football isn't a sports league. Salary caps are for players. How do you have a salary cap when the NCAA and schools business model is based on not paying players? Remember, they are "student athletes"....a term BTW that was created out of thin air by the NCAA in a workers comp case....to specifically say players weren't employees. However, my guess the courts are going to change that...and when it does, things will really get interesting.

Nice dodge, Harry.   Salary caps for players has, obviously, been a non-issue for most of the 21st century-- until very recently.

But the lop-sided history of 21st century college football finance is glaringly obvious.  The same handful of heavily-bankrolled schools compete for the title every year nowadays.

In reality, one of the biggest issues undermining some semblance of regional parity in American college football are the HUGE discrepancies in coaches' salaries.

And the coach-poaching enabled by monopolistic media contracts (and $$$) plays a major role in undermining programs and player recruitment at universities who aren't getting the big media bucks.

In any case, it's a waste of time to argue with a sociopath about issues of ethics and fairness, or laissez faire capitalism vs. utilitarianism.

It's like trying to discuss Shakespeare with a rooster.

Cool. As usual, you can’t hang with the discussion so you fold and throw personal attacks on your way out the door. FTR, as expected.

[DrSchadenfreude]

Mar 26, 2024 7:30:31 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 25, 2024 18:11:02 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Nice dodge, Harry.   Salary caps for players has, obviously, been a non-issue for most of the 21st century-- until very recently.

But the lop-sided history of 21st century college football finance is glaringly obvious.  The same handful of heavily-bankrolled schools compete for the title every year nowadays.

In reality, one of the biggest issues undermining some semblance of regional parity in American college football are the HUGE discrepancies in coaches' salaries.

And the coach-poaching enabled by monopolistic media contracts (and $$$) plays a major role in undermining programs and player recruitment at universities who aren't getting the big media bucks.

In any case, it's a waste of time to argue with a sociopath about issues of ethics and fairness, or laissez faire capitalism vs. utilitarianism.

It's like trying to discuss Shakespeare with a rooster.

Cool. As usual, you can’t hang with the discussion so you fold and throw personal attacks on your way out the door. FTR, as expected.

Huh?  I can't hang with my own discussion here-- about NCAA v. Oklahoma and the corruption of college football by corporate media capitalism?

What do player salary caps have to do the lop-sided funding and media promotion of the SEC in the 21st century?  Nada.

You've been on the wrong side of the eight ball on this issue for several years now, Harry.  Always denying sleaze.

Try listing NCAA football champs and conferences by year during the past 50 years, then tell us if you notice any odd trends. 

[oujour76]

Mar 26, 2024 16:33:34 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Mar 26, 2024 7:30:31 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Cool. As usual, you can’t hang with the discussion so you fold and throw personal attacks on your way out the door. FTR, as expected.

Huh?  I can't hang with my own discussion here-- about NCAA v. Oklahoma and the corruption of college football by corporate media capitalism? Truth is you can't hang in any discussion without going to personal attacks, just like you did here. The Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA was in violation of Federal law. Love to hear your legal argument for believing the NCAA should be exempt from that, and be awarded a legal monopoly. Fact is, the Court agreed that the NCAA shouldn't have that power. Well and good that Byron White disagreed...his opinion didn't carry the day. You act as if he walks on water just because he's from Colorado. He's nothing special....just another Justice who sometimes got it right and sometimes got it wrong.
What do player salary caps have to do the lop-sided funding and media promotion of the SEC in the 21st century?  Nada. If salary caps have no place, why did you bring them up in the first place? And suggest their implementation?

You've been on the wrong side of the eight ball on this issue for several years now, Harry.  Always denying sleaze. There you go again....can't hang, go to personal attacks. 

Try listing NCAA football champs and conferences by year during the past 50 years, then tell us if you notice any odd trends. Since 1970 (53 years) with a few exceptions, not more than 10-15 teams go into the season with a legitimate shot at winning a national title. There's always been haves and have nots in college football. The top 10 teams by winning percentage won 40 titles in those 53 years. The top 15 won 49. That's a trend.College football has certainly changed, and can't say I like all of them. That said, the NCAA business model, which was built on sand, and destined to ultimately collapse is the main cause. At least that's how I see it.

[DrSchadenfreude]

Mar 27, 2024 14:23:51 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 26, 2024 16:33:34 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Huh?  I can't hang with my own discussion here-- about NCAA v. Oklahoma and the corruption of college football by corporate media capitalism? Truth is you can't hang in any discussion without going to personal attacks, just like you did here. The Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA was in violation of Federal law. Love to hear your legal argument for believing the NCAA should be exempt from that, and be awarded a legal monopoly. Fact is, the Court agreed that the NCAA shouldn't have that power. Well and good that Byron White disagreed...his opinion didn't carry the day. You act as if he walks on water just because he's from Colorado. He's nothing special....just another Justice who sometimes got it right and sometimes got it wrong.
What do player salary caps have to do the lop-sided funding and media promotion of the SEC in the 21st century?  Nada. If salary caps have no place, why did you bring them up in the first place? And suggest their implementation?

You've been on the wrong side of the eight ball on this issue for several years now, Harry.  Always denying sleaze. There you go again....can't hang, go to personal attacks. 

Try listing NCAA football champs and conferences by year during the past 50 years, then tell us if you notice any odd trends. Since 1970 (53 years) with a few exceptions, not more than 10-15 teams go into the season with a legitimate shot at winning a national title. There's always been haves and have nots in college football. The top 10 teams by winning percentage won 40 titles in those 53 years. The top 15 won 49. That's a trend.College football has certainly changed, and can't say I like all of them. That said, the NCAA business model, which was built on sand, and destined to ultimately collapse is the main cause. At least that's how I see it.

The 21st century monopolistic/capitalist devolution of college football is the opposite of economic Pareto Optimality.

It's glaringly obvious.

The heavy corporate media funding and promotion of the SEC in the 21st century has been the most blatant example.  

And the Big Ten is now engaged in a similar monopolistic process-- while cherry-picking a handful of Western teams to create a pseudo-"national" league.

They went after L.A. because of the media market.

It's like a set up designed by John D. Rockefeller or Cornelius Vanderbilt in the 19th century.

Instead of having something approximating Pareto Optimal balance across geographic regions in the United States, we have witnessed massively imbalanced funding and promotion of a few universities, while others-- especially in the Western half of the U.S.-- have been relegated to late night television, and routine coach-poaching by Eastern teams.

And the fundamental problem has been the absence of a national administrative authority to ensure some semblance of Pareto Optimality in media coverage and funding of teams.

That's why the demolition of the NCAA by the SCOTUS was the origin of the problem.

If not an empowered NCAA, what sort of administrative authority is supposed to maintain fair-and-balanced Pareto Optimality?

And, now, look at the damage the current B10 and SEC media monopolies with ESPN and Fox have done in the U.S.!

From Stillwater, Waco, Lubbock, and Fort Worth to Tucson, Tempe, Salt Lake City, Berkely, Corvallis, Pullman, et. al., the damage has been major.

This recent corporate monopolistic horseshit has been the diametric opposite of a Pareto Optimal improvement in Power Five Conference football-- as a national sport.

And it's all about individual greed vs. the public good.

I wonder how this monopolistic B10/SEC horseshit will, ultimately, play out in the U.S.

Will remaining college football fans outside of the B10/SEC monopolies boycott the SEC and B10 games?

It's somewhat trivial, compared to more important matters, but, IMO, they should.

[oujour76]

Mar 27, 2024 17:59:08 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Mar 27, 2024 14:23:51 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

The 21st century monopolistic/capitalist devolution of college football is the opposite of economic Pareto Optimality.

It's glaringly obvious.

The heavy corporate media funding and promotion of the SEC in the 21st century has been the most blatant example.  

And the Big Ten is now engaged in a similar monopolistic process-- while cherry-picking a handful of Western teams to create a pseudo-"national" league.

They went after L.A. because of the media market.

It's like a set up designed by John D. Rockefeller or Cornelius Vanderbilt in the 19th century.

Instead of having something approximating Pareto Optimal balance across geographic regions in the United States, we have witnessed massively imbalanced funding and promotion of a few universities, while others-- especially in the Western half of the U.S.-- have been relegated to late night television, and routine coach-poaching by Eastern teams.

And the fundamental problem has been the absence of a national administrative authority to ensure some semblance of Pareto Optimality in media coverage and funding of teams.

That's why the demolition of the NCAA by the SCOTUS was the origin of the problem.

If not an empowered NCAA, what sort of administrative authority is supposed to maintain fair-and-balanced Pareto Optimality?

And, now, look at the damage the current B10 and SEC media monopolies with ESPN and Fox have done in the U.S.!

From Stillwater, Waco, Lubbock, and Fort Worth to Tucson, Tempe, Salt Lake City, Berkely, Corvallis, Pullman, et. al., the damage has been major.

This recent corporate monopolistic horseshit has been the diametric opposite of a Pareto Optimal improvement in Power Five Conference football-- as a national sport.

And it's all about individual greed vs. the public good.

I wonder how this monopolistic B10/SEC horseshit will, ultimately, play out in the U.S.

Will remaining college football fans outside of the B10/SEC monopolies boycott the SEC and B10 games?

It's somewhat trivial, compared to more important matters, but, IMO, they should.

At some point, and fairly soon imo, there will be a commissioner for college football. But, the “league” will have only 35-40 teams. Trying to do it for 130 D1 teams is not manageable, and won’t happen.

BTW, you still haven’t answered why you believe the NCAA should have been exempted from Federal law.

The NCAA business model was fatally flawed, and destined to fail. They keep losing in the courts for a reason.

[DrSchadenfreude]

Mar 27, 2024 20:23:35 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 27, 2024 17:59:08 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

The 21st century monopolistic/capitalist devolution of college football is the opposite of economic Pareto Optimality.

It's glaringly obvious.

The heavy corporate media funding and promotion of the SEC in the 21st century has been the most blatant example.  

And the Big Ten is now engaged in a similar monopolistic process-- while cherry-picking a handful of Western teams to create a pseudo-"national" league.

They went after L.A. because of the media market.

It's like a set up designed by John D. Rockefeller or Cornelius Vanderbilt in the 19th century.

Instead of having something approximating Pareto Optimal balance across geographic regions in the United States, we have witnessed massively imbalanced funding and promotion of a few universities, while others-- especially in the Western half of the U.S.-- have been relegated to late night television, and routine coach-poaching by Eastern teams.

And the fundamental problem has been the absence of a national administrative authority to ensure some semblance of Pareto Optimality in media coverage and funding of teams.

That's why the demolition of the NCAA by the SCOTUS was the origin of the problem.

If not an empowered NCAA, what sort of administrative authority is supposed to maintain fair-and-balanced Pareto Optimality?

And, now, look at the damage the current B10 and SEC media monopolies with ESPN and Fox have done in the U.S.!

From Stillwater, Waco, Lubbock, and Fort Worth to Tucson, Tempe, Salt Lake City, Berkely, Corvallis, Pullman, et. al., the damage has been major.

This recent corporate monopolistic horseshit has been the diametric opposite of a Pareto Optimal improvement in Power Five Conference football-- as a national sport.

And it's all about individual greed vs. the public good.

I wonder how this monopolistic B10/SEC horseshit will, ultimately, play out in the U.S.

Will remaining college football fans outside of the B10/SEC monopolies boycott the SEC and B10 games?

It's somewhat trivial, compared to more important matters, but, IMO, they should.

At some point, and fairly soon imo, there will be a commissioner for college football. But, the “league” will have only 35-40 teams. Trying to do it for 130 D1 teams is not manageable, and won’t happen.

BTW, you still haven’t answered why you believe the NCAA should have been exempted from Federal law.

The NCAA business model was fatally flawed, and destined to fail. They keep losing in the courts for a reason.

Well, we can certainly agree that 130 teams are far too many for a functional league.

I'm guessing that we can also agree that the current monopolies are less than Pareto Optimal for the nation, as a whole.

As for the NCAA and the legal issues, I don't know enough about them.

My point is that the common good-- on a broad, national level-- cannot be achieved without a fair administrative authority.

The worst of it, out here in Colorado, is the destructive coach-poaching (with media money) and the relegation of Western football games to late night time slots by the Eastern Sports Promotional Network.

[oujour76]

Mar 27, 2024 20:36:18 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Mar 27, 2024 20:23:35 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

At some point, and fairly soon imo, there will be a commissioner for college football. But, the “league” will have only 35-40 teams. Trying to do it for 130 D1 teams is not manageable, and won’t happen.

BTW, you still haven’t answered why you believe the NCAA should have been exempted from Federal law.

The NCAA business model was fatally flawed, and destined to fail. They keep losing in the courts for a reason.

Well, we can certainly agree that 130 teams are far too many for a functional league.

I'm guessing that we can also agree that the current monopolies are less than Pareto Optimal for the nation, as a whole.

As for the NCAA and the legal issues, I don't know enough about them.

My point is that the common good-- on a broad, national level-- cannot be achieved without a fair administrative authority.

The worst of it, out here in Colorado, is the destructive coach-poaching (with media money) and the relegation of Western football games to late night time slots by the Eastern Sports Promotional Network.

There has never been “equality” in college football. Not now, and not back in the day. NCAA losing time after time in the courts should tell you all you need to know about the legal issues. As for PAC 12, zero sympathy. Failed to adapt to the changing landscape and got burned by their own arrogance and stupidity. Could have had OU and Texas and turned it down. Would have added two huge, national TV draws. And added games in the Central time zone. But PAC 12 was too smug and smart for that. Looking at you Larry Scott.

www.si.com/college/stanford/football/looking-back-at-the-time-larry-scott-opted-to-not-add-texas-and-oklahoma-to-the-pac-12

[DrSchadenfreude]

Mar 27, 2024 21:39:13 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 27, 2024 20:36:18 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Well, we can certainly agree that 130 teams are far too many for a functional league.

I'm guessing that we can also agree that the current monopolies are less than Pareto Optimal for the nation, as a whole.

As for the NCAA and the legal issues, I don't know enough about them.

My point is that the common good-- on a broad, national level-- cannot be achieved without a fair administrative authority.

The worst of it, out here in Colorado, is the destructive coach-poaching (with media money) and the relegation of Western football games to late night time slots by the Eastern Sports Promotional Network.

There has never been “equality” in college football. Not now, and not back in the day. NCAA losing time after time in the courts should tell you all you need to know about the legal issues. As for PAC 12, zero sympathy. Failed to adapt to the changing landscape and got burned by their own arrogance and stupidity. Could have had OU and Texas and turned it down. Would have added two huge, national TV draws. And added games in the Central time zone. But PAC 12 was too smug and smart for that. Looking at you Larry Scott.

www.si.com/college/stanford/football/looking-back-at-the-time-larry-scott-opted-to-not-add-texas-and-oklahoma-to-the-pac-12

Dog-Eat-Dog doesn't lead to Pareto Optimality for any socio-economic systems.

It leads to capitalist monopolies.

There can't be a functional, fair sports league of any kind without a fair administrative authority.

It ain't rocket science.

[oujour76]

Mar 28, 2024 11:33:43 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Mar 27, 2024 21:39:13 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

There has never been “equality” in college football. Not now, and not back in the day. NCAA losing time after time in the courts should tell you all you need to know about the legal issues. As for PAC 12, zero sympathy. Failed to adapt to the changing landscape and got burned by their own arrogance and stupidity. Could have had OU and Texas and turned it down. Would have added two huge, national TV draws. And added games in the Central time zone. But PAC 12 was too smug and smart for that. Looking at you Larry Scott.

www.si.com/college/stanford/football/looking-back-at-the-time-larry-scott-opted-to-not-add-texas-and-oklahoma-to-the-pac-12

Dog-Eat-Dog doesn't lead to Pareto Optimality for any socio-economic systems.

It leads to capitalist monopolies.

There can't be a functional, fair sports league of any kind without a fair administrative authority.

It ain't rocket science.

Good Lord. Pareto Optimality is about market efficiency, it's not about fairness and equality. But, feel free to post your plan for a functional, fair college football sports league. Which, of course, should include all 130 D1 teams. Shouldn't take you long...I mean, it ain't rocket science, right?

[DrSchadenfreude]

Mar 28, 2024 13:58:55 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Mar 28, 2024 11:33:43 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Dog-Eat-Dog doesn't lead to Pareto Optimality for any socio-economic systems.

It leads to capitalist monopolies.

There can't be a functional, fair sports league of any kind without a fair administrative authority.

It ain't rocket science.

Good Lord. Pareto Optimality is about market efficiency, it's not about fairness and equality. But, feel free to post your plan for a functional, fair college football sports league. Which, of course, should include all 130 D1 teams. Shouldn't take you long...I mean, it ain't rocket science, right?

Pareto Optimality is about optimizing outcomes across a socio-economic spectrum-- without harming other parties, right?

In contrast, look at the damage you sleazy $3 dollar bills in Norman and Austin have done to your Big XII colleagues!

These new ESPN and Fox monopolies with the SEC and B10 are the opposite of Pareto Optimal.

Will it, ultimately, bite you guys in the ass-- if other Power Five college football fans in the U.S. boycott your games?

Speaking for myself, I won't be watching any B10 or SEC games in the future.

[AlaCowboy]

Mar 28, 2024 17:45:20 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Mar 28, 2024 13:58:55 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Good Lord. Pareto Optimality is about market efficiency, it's not about fairness and equality. But, feel free to post your plan for a functional, fair college football sports league. Which, of course, should include all 130 D1 teams. Shouldn't take you long...I mean, it ain't rocket science, right?

Pareto Optimality is about optimizing outcomes across a socio-economic spectrum-- without harming other parties, right?

In contrast, look at the damage you sleazy $3 dollar bills in Norman and Austin have done to your Big XII colleagues!

These new ESPN and Fox monopolies with the SEC and B10 are the opposite of Pareto Optimal.

Will it, ultimately, bite you guys in the ass-- if other Power Five college football fans in the U.S. boycott your games?

Speaking for myself, I won't be watching any B10 or SEC games in the future.

B10 and SEC teams and fans won't lose any sleep over your absence. You can watch Colorado in their bowl games. Oh wait! They don't make it to bowl games.

[DrSchadenfreude]

Mar 28, 2024 21:53:03 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Mar 28, 2024 17:45:20 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Pareto Optimality is about optimizing outcomes across a socio-economic spectrum-- without harming other parties, right?

In contrast, look at the damage you sleazy $3 dollar bills in Norman and Austin have done to your Big XII colleagues!

These new ESPN and Fox monopolies with the SEC and B10 are the opposite of Pareto Optimal.

Will it, ultimately, bite you guys in the ass-- if other Power Five college football fans in the U.S. boycott your games?

Speaking for myself, I won't be watching any B10 or SEC games in the future.

B10 and SEC teams and fans won't lose any sleep over your absence. You can watch Colorado in their bowl games. Oh wait! They don't make it to bowl games.

Down memory lane with dopey Dung-head Ra mey, the Alabama Welcher...

This was a good football game.

The Georgia Bulldogs got their future All Pro WR A.J. Green back for their game in Boulder-- but Colorado's future First Round draft pick, CB Jimmy Smith, succeeded in shutting Green down at Folsom Field.


Colorado Buffs Stun Georgia Bulldogs in Boulder
Georgia Fan Falsely Claimed Denver Doctor Planned to Shoot Him at Folsom Field

cubuffs.com/news/2010/10/2/204983260

October 2, 2010