NCAA Football '12-13

[grumbler]

Interesting news out of the SEC: 

With only three weeks until the June 20 deadline when conference leaders hoped to have a final playoff model to sell to television executives, the time for compromise draws near. Which is why it's so interesting that the chair of the SEC's presidents and chancellors group would draw a line in the sand on one of the most controversial issues. Florida president Bernie Machen said the SEC would not compromise on having the four highest ranked teams in the playoff rather than a group of conference champions.

"We won't compromise on that," Machen said at the SEC spring meetings. "I think the public wants the top four. I think almost everybody wants the top four."

At this juncture, such a bold statement raises some serious questions about whether conference leaders can reach a consensus. It's one thing for a league leader to say the conference prefers a particular model. It's quite another to eliminate all wiggle room on a particular issue.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/andy_staples/05/31/sec.meetings/index.html#ixzz1wfXkIOws

Interesting that the SEC has decided to take a cue from the Republican House, when  that institution is enjoying its worst public image ever.  If the SEC cannot even figure out how to determine which of its teams is the best, maybe they should spend more time on that question, rather than worry about how a national playoff should be structured.  Replaying games seems to me to be a foolish waste of scarce tournament spaces; sure, if there are 32 or 64 teams, replays don't cause much waste, but not if there are only four spots. 

I am wondering what will happen if the other  conferences call their bluff.  A standoff that leads to a +1 game, a standoff that sees the SEC on the outside, or a back-down from the SEC (as in "he doesn't speak for the conference")?

I don't think more beauty-contest championships will satisfy anyone.

[Valmy]

Well the Big 12 came out in favor of the top 4 but claiming you are not going to compromise on it is pretty crazy.

[grumbler]

Well the Big 12 came out in favor of the top 4 but claiming you are not going to compromise on it is pretty crazy.

The Big 12 favors a selection committee.  That's different from the SEC, which wants the top 4 in the current BCS "beauty contest plus black box" system.

[PDH]

As long as traditional football powerhouses like Wyoming don't get left out, I am okay with this.

[MadImmortalMan]

I rather like the idea of the four being the champs of the SEC, B12, Pac12 and B10(12). Screw you Notre Dame--join a conference. Same for Miami and FlSt.

[MadBurgerMaker]

Miami is about to get wrecked.  I don't think it's really going to matter much for them for a while. 

E:  I don't necessarily mean the death penalty, just that it could be one of those "might as well be the death penalty" type deals.  I personally wouldn't really be opposed to Miami being in the Big 12 (a weekend in Miami to see a Horns football game just wouldn't be a bad thing ever, I don't think), but the upcoming punishment they're going to get, and how their administration might react to that, is certainly something the "realignment people" are looking at.  Why bother adding them if they get crushed and are looking like they're going to be SMU+beaches for the next 10 or 20 years and all they do is drag the SOS down?

[grumbler]

I rather like the idea of the four being the champs of the SEC, B12, Pac12 and B10(12). Screw you Notre Dame--join a conference. Same for Miami and FlSt.

My current favorite B10-proposed scheme is the "conference champions if in the top six" scheme, so long as the "top six" choosing system isn't the current system.  This allows for wild cards.

Better would be the B12's selection committee system, though.  At least that would have to be somewhat transparent, even if you didn't buy the explanation.

[CountDeMoney]

This allows for wild cards.

Yeah, I like this concept, too.  Opens up the possibilities for collective Berkut-style aneurysms.

[Ed Anger]

MOTHERFUCKING STONEBURNER. Urban SMASH!

ED ANGRY!

[CountDeMoney]

Today, we are all Badgers.



That's right, even you. 

[grumbler]

Oops!  Turns out UNC has football-player-only courses that offer no instruction or classes, but the students get full credit (for a single 15-page paper that we know will be written for them) while the prof pockets $12k for "teaching" it.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/06/08/2123750/unc-football-players-flocked-to.html#storylink=cpy

'Taken by surprise'

The criminal investigation of the AFAM 280 class came after The N&O requested records related to summer pay Nyang'oro might have received in relation to the suspect classes. Nyang'oro received summer pay only for the AFAM 280 class last summer, and it was the standard amount: $12,000.

Thorp told trustees that the university is trying to get that money back. Thorp said Nyang'oro signed a contract that made it clear the class was to be taught in a lecture format, but he treated it as an independent study.

"Students in the class wrote papers and were graded," Thorp said in the letter. "Nevertheless, Nyang'oro did not meet the University's instructional expectations, and we do not believe that he should have been paid."

Trustees either declined comment or couldn't be reached Friday.

Email correspondence released Friday shows that Nyang'oro went to a professor in his department, Tim McMillan, on June 14 to add AFAM 280 to the summer calendar. McMillan normally teaches the class.

"Sure," McMillan replied. "How many students will I have?"

"No more than 5," Nyang'oro responded. "I will be Instructor of record and relieve you of responsibility and bother. A big relief for you?????"

Nyang'oro then talked to Jan Yopp, a journalism professor who also serves as dean for the summer school. On June 16, the day the summer semester began, Yopp sent a notice to Nyang'oro that the class was open for registration.

Four days later, Nyang'oro told her 18 students had enrolled in the class. It makes no mention that all were football players.

"I am totally taken by surprise!" Nyang'oro wrote.

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/06/08/2123750/unc-football-players-flocked-to.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

On top of all the other NCAA allegations against UNC for academic fraud and corrupt coaches, administrators, and boosters, I'm wondering if this will be the tipping point for the death penalty.  It's hard to imagine UNC claiming that they have a handle on things when this occurred after a host of other improprieties had been publicized.

[PDH]

I want to get 12k per course 

I would pass athletes.

[grumbler]

Seedy gets a shout-out from mgoblog:  http://mgoblog.com/content/michigan-museday-counts-de-monet

Michigan Museday Counts de Monet

Seth gets the monicker slightly wrong and is corrected in the second comment.

An interesting article for those who care about the money side of football (as opposed to the Money side of football).  These numbers are for all athletics, of course, not just football, but we know football dominated university athletic finances.

An interesting exception to this rule would seem to be UNC basketball; UNC received almost $43 million in direct TB revenues from 2008-2011, plus whatever the ACC pays as a conference (not enough to make the cut here).  Since all the ACC games are covered by the ACC TV contract, these must be TV rights for non-conference games, which means basketball primarily.  That's some pretty sweet cash for an inexpensive sport (relatively speaking).

The weirdest number on the face of it is OSU getting almost $15 million for playing away games at USC and at Miami (FL) (plus whatever BBall game income they got).  That number's gotta be a typo, or has to include bowl revenue.  Since they are reporting $22 million less than Michigan in TV revenue from the NCAA and B10, I believe it is probably the latter.

Sweetest deal goes to Indiana which with a crap football team gets equal shares of the B10 Network and conference TV revenues, and then gets NCAA revenues based on games played in the Big Dance.  Indiana makes more TV revenue than anyone on the list except Ohio State (and less than $2 million less than even them by eyeball math).

Texas, no surprise, is the big winner in total revenue (about 10% more than #2 Alabama) and led in ticket sales (which kinda surprised me, since Texas season tickets are only $400 and the stadium seats only 100,000 = $40M per season, while Michigan's tickets are $375 and the stadium holds 114,000 = $42.75M - not to mention OSU, whose season tickets are a whopping $600 in a 102,000-seat stadium, for a season gate of $61M).  All of those assume that all ticket-holders are season ticket holders, which isn't true, but does texas have that many fewer student tickets?

Texas also led in royalties (i.e. paraphernalia sales and ads), which surprised me not at all.  Michigan being #2 did surprise me; it's been a while since Michigan was a "top name" in any sport.  Must be all the recent jersey sales in Ohio.

[grumbler]

An amusing add-on from the numbers in the article listed above:  Central Florida charges $99 for season tickets to their 45,000-seat stadium, meaning they get $4.5 million a year in gate if they sell out every game at season-ticket prices.  They charge a sports surcharge to all of their students that amounts to over $16.5 million a year.  That seems to me to be the most bizarre and corrupt financing plan in college football.

[MadBurgerMaker]

but does texas have that many fewer student tickets?

I haven't been to a game in a while, but IIRC it's like 19 - 27 (maybe 18 too), some number of sections in the upper decks above that (possibly all of the upper decks above those sections, but I'm not sure), with the band and more student seating in the little south endzone section.  Visitors sit in ~32 and 132.  Maybe part of the sections next to those as well.  101-109 are the good spots where I like/d to sit, with actual seats with backs and arms and such without being too terribly expensive.