2025 NCAA Football Thread

[buddha]

45 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I have to think the traditional top Big10/Pac10 legacy schools would love to combine to do something on their own (meaning separate from the SEC etc)  *if* they can figure it out - which may in the end be unlikely, but that doesn't mean they won't try  But as you note,  it comes down to the question of where the cut-off line falls for who gets left out and what they estimate the goodwill cost would be be to just break the conference. 

When I saw the terms of the 'House' settlement the first thing I thought is that sure,  it can work for the top 20 or maybe even 40 teams, but it's not going to work for anyone below that tier. So there are about 100 D1 teams out there facing a future they really can't afford.

the big ten schools better pray um and osu want them to come with them.  the big schools DO need to play SOMEBODY.

the super league might be the final cut between academics and football.  the big ten shares a lot of academic information infrastructure with each other.  would that be lost in this arrangement?  what about other sports?

lots of uncertainty.  i still think it all points to another realignment coming soon, likely when the current tv deals are up.  the logical ending would be big ten-sec like the afc-nfc.  everyone else in the second tier.  

osu and um see what happened in the acc, with their tiered payments system.  i was skeptical they would go for that in the big ten given its tradition, but i'm probably wrong about that.

[Hongbit]

3 hours ago, buddha said:

again, i dont know why michigan and ohio state (and to a lesser degree penn state and usc) would tie themselves to any deal that stretches to 2046.

i get everyone else in the big ten wanting to nail down the big teams so its hard to leave, but osu and um ha e potentially bigger fish to fry.

if there is a super league, it will include um, osu, psu, and usc.  northwestern and purdue?  not so likely.

I think it’s highly unlikely that college football exists in 2046.  Get the money now why they can.   

AI will kill the current university model that has existed for the past 150 years unless radical changes are made to tuitions and curriculum.  Neither of which will most likely happen because academia believes their history makes them invulnerable to dramatic change.   It will be their death.  

Edited October 8 by Hongbit

[gehringer_2]

5 hours ago, buddha said:

the big ten shares a lot of academic information infrastructure with each other.  would that be lost in this arrangement? 

Not sure what you are referring to -  with respect to things like admissions?

[buddha]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

Not sure what you are referring to -  with respect to things like admissions?

from my time writing theses, they share libraries and other information like that.

[gehringer_2]

24 minutes ago, buddha said:

from my time writing theses, they share libraries and other information like that.

Athletic depts at the big schools are silo'd. What goes on there goes on in its own world. Academic ties between between b10 schools are very strong, and tenured research faculty are a lot closer to their peers at other institutions than they are to anyone in their own Athletic Depts.

Edited October 9 by gehringer_2

[Deleterious]

 

[Deleterious]

Pretty standard for a coach 5 games into his tenure.

 

[Deleterious]

More details are emerging about the possibility of CalPERS becoming an investor, and they aren’t encouraging.

The proposed plan is a one-time $2.4 billion cash infusion for a 20-year deal, giving CalPERS a 10% stake in all future payouts. That kind of agreement is one made by organizations in financial trouble, and the Big Ten clearly isn’t broke.
Why would you give up 10% of all future distributions for money you don’t even need right now?

Under the current equal distribution model, each school receives a 5.5% stake, meaning CalPERS’ share would be roughly double what any school gets.  It’s also likely CalPERS would expect some influence over the new for-profit entity being formed. That means a non-member organization could have a voice in the conference’s future decision-making.

Big Ten nearing decision on $2.4 billion deal with California pension investment fund in landmark move within college athletics

 

[gehringer_2]

9 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

Why would you give up 10% of all future distributions for money you don’t even need right now?

Are you sure they don't need the money right now? I doubt half the teams in the league are truly profitable even if the top ones are.

Notable they don't mention Acker's public opposition to the early outlines of the deal. If it needs to be unanimous and Acker doesn't change his mind and the other Dems on the UM Regents vote with him, it's going to be dead.

Edited October 10 by gehringer_2

[Deleterious]

30 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Are you sure they don't need the money right now? I doubt half the teams in the league are truly profitable even if the top ones are.

Notable they don't mention Acker's public opposition to the early outlines of the deal. If it needs to be unanimous and Acker doesn't change his mind and the other Dems on the UM Regents vote with him, it's going to be dead.

The schools deciding this are not hurting for cash.  If a few schools do need a quick infusion of cash, get a loan with a set payment.  Any deal where you have to pay a percentage of future revenue/profits is always a bad deal.  Especially since the percentage will not be determined by the schools losing money.  It will be determined at the conference level, and the conference is swimming in money.  

It is going to be funny watching these great institutions of higher learning getting absolutely fleeced by the finance bros.  

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Deleterious said:

It is going to be funny watching these great institutions of higher learning getting absolutely fleeced by the finance bros. 

Parenthetically, when Schlissel came to UM, one of his pet projects was to try to get the University to stop paying contractors for expertise it should already have in-house. I don't think he ever got very far with it. 🙄

[buddha]

3 hours ago, Deleterious said:

More details are emerging about the possibility of CalPERS becoming an investor, and they aren’t encouraging.

The proposed plan is a one-time $2.4 billion cash infusion for a 20-year deal, giving CalPERS a 10% stake in all future payouts. That kind of agreement is one made by organizations in financial trouble, and the Big Ten clearly isn’t broke.
Why would you give up 10% of all future distributions for money you don’t even need right now?

Under the current equal distribution model, each school receives a 5.5% stake, meaning CalPERS’ share would be roughly double what any school gets.  It’s also likely CalPERS would expect some influence over the new for-profit entity being formed. That means a non-member organization could have a voice in the conference’s future decision-making.

Big Ten nearing decision on $2.4 billion deal with California pension investment fund in landmark move within college athletics

 

These are public institutions owned by the taxpayers (except for usc and northwestern).  i dont think they can easily sell off state assets like that, even if tony pettiti thinks he's clever by "creating a separate big ten entity" to fold it all into.

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, buddha said:

These are public institutions owned by the taxpayers (except for usc and northwestern).  i dont think they can easily sell off state assets like that, even if tony pettiti thinks he's clever by "creating a separate big ten entity" to fold it all into.

IDK, it's your field 😉, but I would guess they can finagle a lot of leeway as long as is isn't  real or tangible property that's involved. The other thing is that with MSU and UM at least, the boards of regents are constitutionally pretty strong. Not sure who could stop them. I mean the state gov has leverage in terms of  threatening to withhold funds, but they can't do much else to immediately order them not to do something.

[Deleterious]

3 hours ago, buddha said:

These are public institutions owned by the taxpayers (except for usc and northwestern).  i dont think they can easily sell off state assets like that, even if tony pettiti thinks he's clever by "creating a separate big ten entity" to fold it all into.

Media rights would be a state asset and those are sold.  I don't see much difference here.

The separate entity will be created for one reason only.  To separate football from all the other money losing programs.  CalPERS doesn't want to deal with field hockey, bowling, gymnastics, etc.  Maybe men's basketball gets tossed into the new entity, I don't know.  

 

[gehringer_2]

10 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

Media rights would be a state asset and those are sold.  I don't see much difference here.

The separate entity will be created for one reason only.  To separate football from all the other money losing programs.  CalPERS doesn't want to deal with field hockey, bowling, gymnastics, etc.  Maybe men's basketball gets tossed into the new entity, I don't know.  

 

seems college basketball is moving into a no-man's land. Is there even  enough money to beat D-league salaries?

[Deleterious]

18 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

seems college basketball is moving into a no-man's land. Is there even  enough money to beat D-league salaries?

I think a lot depends on if your wealthy alumni like basketball or not.  AJ Dybantsa just received $4 million to play at BYU.  

[Deleterious]

If we are selling state assets, can we start with Rutgers?  

[Motor City Sonics]

UCLA is spanking Sparty right now in East Lansing.    24-7.

Was Foster just a horrible coach and UCLA is actually pretty good?    Or is Sparty really this bad? 

 

 

 

[Motor City Sonics]

Watching UCLA vs. Michigan State

 

Play

30 Second Commercial

Play  Flag.

30 Second Commercial

Play Timeout

30 Second Commrrcial

Play

30 Second Commercial

Play (No Snap, Timeout)

30 Second Commercial

Missed Field Goal

(shockingly no commercial). 

 

I mean, COME ON, MAN - WHAT THE ACTUAL ****?       THIS IS PATHETIC. 

[Motor City Sonics]

Aidan Chiles took the top of a defender's helmet right to the face.    Oh my god that was a hard hit..........

[Deleterious]

WTF MSU

[buddha]

remember when there were actual michigan state fans on this site?

[Deleterious]

Someone in East Lansing needs to get Johnathan Smith Brenda Tracy's number.

[Deleterious]

The Michigan fan in me would have preferred Oklahoma not lose to an unranked team.  

[Deleterious]

Beating the #3 team on the road is a huge win for Indiana.