nico broke ucla

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

They do to a much greater degree than you'd think. Tennessee's women's soccer team didn't begin until 1996, for example.

The notion that sports are economically driven is the issue that separates college from pro sports.

College sports were designed to be good for the college atmosphere while pro sports are a business.

The more we buy into "without football money, schools will drop non revenue sports" tells you how far in the mud schools are about priorities.

 

[05_never_again]

The notion that sports are economically driven is the issue that separates college from pro sports.

College sports were designed to be good for the college atmosphere while pro sports are a business.

The more we buy into "without football money, schools will drop non revenue sports" tells you how far in the mud schools are about priorities.

I agree that is what they were initially designed for, yes. The issue is that over time college sports (especially football and men's basketball, but even some of the smaller sports too) have brought in more money than anybody could have reasonably anticipated, to the point where it became a completely reasonable argument to begin paying the top players in the most popular sports millions of dollars per season. With the revenue sharing rules, the schools have to share that money with athletes in the sports that generate them. That means less money for the other sports.

As incompetent as the NCAA is, that aspect of the current situation we're in isn't really anybody's fault. College sports were never intended to be this popular. It was always supposed to be at a level of interest like glorified intramurals or maybe minor league baseball.

 

[S.C. OrangeMan]

How’s that working out for UCLA?
The current model of college athletics is not sustainable.
The answer is not to just keep spending more.
The athletic departments are bleeding their fans to death and still having to borrow money from the academic side.
so are the tv/streaming providers and apparel brands.
The whole thing is going to crash and burn eventually and when it does, it’s going to be ugly.
Don’t get me wrong, there are always going to be people with more money than brains, but it’s just not going to last, long term.

I've been hearing that since 2019, yet there is no sign of crashing. For every UCLA in the BIG, there is an Ohio State, Oregon, or Indiana.
Funny how their worst teams are in their old footprint. Purdue, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Rutgers and Maryland.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I agree that is what they were initially designed for, yes. The issue is that over time college sports (especially football and men's basketball, but even some of the smaller sports too) have brought in more money than anybody could have reasonably anticipated, to the point where it became a completely reasonable argument to begin paying the top players in the most popular sports millions of dollars per season. With the revenue sharing rules, the schools have to share that money with athletes in the sports that generate them. That means less money for the other sports.

As incompetent as the NCAA is, that aspect of the current situation we're in isn't really anybody's fault. College sports were never intended to be this popular. It was always supposed to be at a level of interest like glorified intramurals or maybe minor league baseball.

It's ABSOLUTELY the fault of the schools who sued the NCAA so they could make their own TV deals and make a ton of money from the work of the athletes without paying them market value.

It ABSOLUTELY goes back to that and the NCAA was on the right side of that argument by saying that the money needed to be limited or things would go off the rails.

 

[05_never_again]

It's ABSOLUTELY the fault of the schools who sued the NCAA so they could make their own TV deals and make a ton of money from the work of the athletes without paying them market value.

It ABSOLUTELY goes back to that and the NCAA was on the right side of that argument by saying that the money needed to be limited or things would go off the rails.

Why are you against someone attempting to realize the true market value of their labor?

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Why are you against someone attempting to realize the true market value of their labor?

Because, as you said, college sports was never supposed to be marketed and monetized like pro sports.

That's exactly what made college different. It wasn't a business. It was about the college experience.

That's how we got here. "Let's enhance our school brand by getting a big TV audience."

Seriously? What's that got to do with a college enhancement sports program?

 

[ButchPlz]

So I asked AI how often do House of Representatives fly on tax payer funded trips. Below is the answer.

U.S. House of Representatives members typically fly every single week to commute between Washington, D.C., and their home districts. [1]

Weekly Commuting Schedule

• • The Routine: Lawmakers generally work in D.C. for three weeks a month.
  • Flight Days: Votes are clustered from Tuesday through Thursday. Members routinely fly to D.C. on Monday and fly back home on Thursday afternoon or Friday.
  • Time at Home: This schedule lets representatives spend long weekends with their constituents and families. [1, 2]
  • Funding: Regular weekly commutes are paid for using taxpayer funds through the Members' Representational Allowance.

I, for one, would rather have my representative spend as much time in his/her home district as possible. You know, to be around the people they represent.

PS: the MRA includes staffing expenses, rent (which they still have to pay), travel, etc. and runs an average of less than $2M/year per member. Now, you can argue whether these folks should have staff and offices and all that all you want, but your first point was stupid and you should feel bad for making it and digging yourself even deeper.

 

[05_never_again]

Because, as you said, college sports was never supposed to be marketed and monetized like pro sports.

That's exactly what made college different. It wasn't a business. It was about the college experience.

That's how we got here. "Let's enhance our school brand by getting a big TV audience."

Seriously? What's that got to do with a college enhancement sports program?

You have millions of people willing to pay money to attend the games and broadcasters willing to pay billions to broadcast the games on TV. The schools are just supposed to say no?

Never mind the billions of dollars that sports bring in also getting allocated to the academic side of the house. For example, the best thing that has ever happened for the quality of education offered at the University of Alabama is probably Nick Saban.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Don’t put that evil on Nico.

UCLA has broken for quite some time.

He is a symptom, not a cause.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

You have millions of people willing to pay money to attend the games and broadcasters willing to pay billions to broadcast the games on TV. The schools are just supposed to say no?

Never mind the billions of dollars that sports bring in also getting allocated to the academic side of the house. For example, the best thing that has ever happened for the quality of education offered at the University of Alabama is probably Nick Saban.

You simply cannot serve two masters. It is in a Book I like.

You can't hold to "we're an amateur athletic institution" while you have a "talent fee" specifically dedicated to paying players.

This says: the University of Tennessee experience is not enough to make great players come to Knoxville, we need money to pay talent.

That's the definition of a pro relationship. Whether you like Knoxville or not, we'll pay you big money to come here and play.

That goes back to what is the justification for an educational institution to be in the pro sports business?

 

[05_never_again]

You simply cannot serve two masters. It is in a Book I like.

You can't hold to "we're an amateur athletic institution" while you have a "talent fee" specifically dedicated to paying players.

This says: the University of Tennessee experience is not enough to make great players come to Knoxville, we need money to pay talent.

That's the definition of a pro relationship. Whether you like Knoxville or not, we'll pay you big money to come here and play.

That goes back to what is the justification for an educational institution to be in the pro sports business?

I would argue that nobody holds to the "they're amateurs" line anymore, except maybe the NCAA. And they're totally irrelevant. Yes, it is a professional relationship now because these sports bring in incredible amounts of money. So what?

The justification for an educational institution to be in the pro sports business is that it makes a ton of money for the institution, including, as I already stated, a significant infusion of funds for academics. Having great athletic programs is also great for academics. Seriously, I know it's Alabama but look at what has happened there academically since Saban. Their enrollment, particularly their out of state enrollment, exploded while at the same time becoming way more selective. It's totally changed the types of student they can attract, the faculty they can attract, the research and therefore research dollars they can get, etc. It's completely changed the reputation of the place.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I would argue that nobody holds to the "they're amateurs" line anymore, except maybe the NCAA. And they're totally irrelevant. Yes, it is a professional relationship now because these sports bring in incredible amounts of money. So what?

The justification for an educational institution to be in the pro sports business is that it makes a ton of money for the institution, including, as I already stated, a significant infusion of funds for academics. Having great athletic programs is also great for academics. Seriously, I know it's Alabama but look at what has happened there academically since Saban. Their enrollment, particularly their out of state enrollment, exploded while at the same time become way more selective. It's totally changed the types of student they can attract, the faculty they can attract, the research and therefore research dollars they can get, etc.

The problem for schools is they are non profit according to the IRS who likely won't like the fact the athletic dept is a pro sports entity.

I'm not an attorney but I'm pretty sure also that states owning a pro sports business creates legal issues.

It's a bad match. School sports, by your own admission, were never intended to be this kind of organization.

 

[05_never_again]

The problem for schools is they are non profit according to the IRS who likely won't like the fact the athletic dept is a pro sports entity.

I'm not an attorney but I'm pretty sure also that states owning a pro sports business creates legal issues.

It's a bad match. School sports, by your own admission, were never intended to be this kind of organization.

Non-profit does not mean "not allowed to conduct activities that bring in more money." As long as the profits generated stay within the athletic department or the university, the IRS doesn't care. Utah created on that is actually for-profit.

 

[Volfanstucknga]

I, for one, would rather have my representative spend as much time in his/her home district as possible. You know, to be around the people they represent.

PS: the MRA includes staffing expenses, rent (which they still have to pay), travel, etc. and runs an average of less than $2M/year per member. Now, you can argue whether these folks should have staff and offices and all that all you want, but your first point was stupid and you should feel bad for making it and digging yourself even deeper.

LOL
You have your belief and I have my stupid points. Have a great day.

 

[Sarms58]

Anybody see USC crowd last week? They said 51k and it was closer to 20k at kickoff. LA doesn’t care about college football.

I heard one of the talking heads this morning explaining that California fans won’t come to a day game in 100 degree weather….thats funny to me…SEC - it just means more!

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Non-profit does not mean "not allowed to conduct activities that bring in more money." As long as the profits generated stay within the athletic department or the university, the IRS doesn't care. Utah created on that is actually for-profit.

A quick Google shows UU "partnered" with private equity, basically an awful look of getting corporate cash involved. I see that as private equity simply biding their time like a vulture.

What other reason could there be when private equity is denied control but puts in money? They're just vultures getting in on the bottom floor.

Why all the twisting and turning to justify pro ball? We both know that's not what college sports should be about?

Many on VN have said, "without the connection to UT, I'm not a supporter" but the obvious connection to UT for most players is money UT pays them, not real interest in the school.

I guess "the love of money" is good for the school so it might as well be good for the players in your eyes.

It ain't college ball, though. It's a sham pro league.

 

[05_never_again]

A quick Google shows UU "partnered" with private equity, basically an awful look of getting corporate cash involved. I see that as private equity simply biding their time like a vulture.

What other reason could there be when private equity is denied control but puts in money? They're just vultures getting in on the bottom floor.

Why all the twisting and turning to justify pro ball? We both know that's not what college sports should be about?

Many on VN have said, "without the connection to UT, I'm not a supporter" but the obvious connection to UT for most players is money UT pays them, not real interest in the school.

I guess "the love of money" is good for the school so it might as well be good for the players in your eyes.

It ain't college ball, though. It's a sham pro league.

What is your solution to this? You say a lot about what college sports is not, this or that shouldn't happen, etc.

Regardless, it's been a "sham pro league" for a long time. Guys got paid under the table for decades before NIL.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

What is your solution to this? You say a lot about what college sports is not, this or that shouldn't happen, etc.

Regardless, it's been a "sham pro league" for a long time. Guys got paid under the table for decades before NIL.

My solution is for the schools to get out of the pro sports business. Spin the elite teams off as a pro league and let college athletes return to being college athletes.

Can a tennis player get NIL? Sure, if they can but few schools will have pro tennis teams or lacrosse or hockey or whatever. The major money is in football and basketball, where the big media contracts are. Get them away from the schools, recruit non revenue athletes without all the "we can pay you" crap.

You know, let college athletes be college students and pro athletes be pro athletes.

I've no problem watching a non connected to the school except by lease of the name Vols because that's essentially what I'm watching this Saturday.

 

[05_never_again]

My solution is for the schools to get out of the pro sports business. Spin the elite teams off as a pro league and let college athletes return to being college athletes.

Can a tennis player get NIL? Sure, if they can but few schools will have pro tennis teams or lacrosse or hockey or whatever. The major money is in football and basketball, where the big media contracts are. Get them away from the schools, recruit non revenue athletes without all the "we can pay you" crap.

You know, let college athletes be college students and pro athletes be pro athletes.

I've no problem watching a non connected to the school except by lease of the name Vols because that's essentially what I'm watching this Saturday.

So nothing practical. "Hey schools, you need to willing give up this huge revenue source" isn't exactly a feasible solution.

How exactly would a school "spin off" one of their athletic teams anyway? Who would buy it? Is it even theirs to sell to begin with?

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

So nothing practical. "Hey schools, you need to willing give up this huge revenue source" isn't exactly a feasible solution.

How exactly would a school "spin off" one of their athletic teams?

As Utah seems to have shown, private equity or pro sports enthusiasts (perhaps even Randy Boyd and other investors in Knoxville) might be very interested in owning the Vols team.

There's money to be made for the school via a lease of facilities and name without the hassle of soliciting donors for education AND sports.

Let the team owners worry about that crap and you know...... I dunno...... just maybe the University of Tennessee admins could concentrate on something like education.

 

[05_never_again]

As Utah seems to have shown, private equity or pro sports enthusiasts (perhaps even Randy Boyd and other investors in Knoxville) might be very interested in owning the Vols team.

There's money to be made for the school via a lease of facilities and name without the hassle of soliciting donors for education AND sports.

Let the team owners worry about that crap and you know...... I dunno...... just maybe the University of Tennessee admins could concentrate on something like education.

Otro doesn’t own the team. They have a minority stake in a newly created company that runs marketing and gameday operations.

I don’t know how the university could sell the team itself. It was created by a university system. I have no idea how such a deal to sell the team would work, and a state government would probably never allow it anyway.

 

[NighthawkVol]

Don’t put that evil on Nico.

UCLA has broken for quite some time.

Yep. Arguably the most underachieving football program in America. With the proximate talent, the weak PAC 10 schedule, gobs of donor money, and that gorgeous campus in a much better part of town than USC, they should have been a power program for most of the last century. Instead, they’re West Coast North Carolina.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Otro doesn’t own the team. They have a minority stake in a newly created company that runs marketing and gameday operations.

I don’t know how the university could sell the team itself. It was created by a university system. I have no idea how such a deal to sell the team would work, and a state government would probably never allow it anyway.

It's obvious, though, that venture capital is looking at that deal as what we used to call "feeding the baby" so that one day it takes care of you. Venture capital is looking at turning a profit from a later sale or squeezing as much money as they can from an asset before dumping it.

There's little reason for them to be investing in UU unless they think they can make money in some way from the asset.

My thought is the courts will declare athletes employees of the university and collective bargaining will be a nightmare because I'm not sure but states often have rules about unionized employees. I think it gets too messy legally for the state to want to own several different pro/college teams.

 

[livefaith]

If you left your conference of 200 years to go for Big10 TV money, then why are you broke?

 

[Volle]

College FB and BB will eventually break from the NCAA and be independent for-profit sports franchises with licensing agreements to use the university name and facilities. All other sports will be subsidized through donations or foundations as "club" sports or Intramurals. Basically, it's the end of amateur football/basketball at the college level.