menu
Logo
Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: Holy Crap, Steinbrecher is Making Big Changes
Page: 1 of 2
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 5/16/2011 2:54 PM
http://www.mlive.com/broncos/index.ssf/2011/05/new_mandat...

If nothing else, this will end the debate on whether or not the CIT is worth it.
Last Edited: 5/16/2011 2:55:08 PM by JSF
KyleWvr13
General User
Member Since: 11/10/2010
Location: Pottstown, PA
Post Count: 503
mail
KyleWvr13
mail
Posted: 5/16/2011 3:06 PM
Rewarding programs that put forth effort and make the conference look good and punishing the ones that make the conference look terrible?

This is gold.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 5/16/2011 4:04 PM
Graham Couch wrote:expand_more

Similarly, the West Division has been set back by a series of unnecessary coaching changes by self-serving, greedy and simple-minded administrators.



I'm trying to figure out what the "unnecessary" coaching changes might be?  Stan Joplin? Tim Buckley?


Overall I think this proposal is great.
Jeff McKinney
Moderator
JM
Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,163
person
mail
Jeff McKinney
mail
Posted: 5/16/2011 4:12 PM
I agree that this policy move is a step in the right direction, but it is only a modest step. 

Couch cites some of the more fundamental issues, such as institutional committment to basketball as demonstrated in facilities, coaching salaries, etc.

One of my questions:  if the money is simply not there at the MAC schools, will new rules make much difference?  With funding and budgets being issues almost across the board, is this a time when institutional committment can be increased? 
Bobcat Love
General User
BL
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Post Count: 1,193
person
mail
Bobcat Love
mail
Posted: 5/16/2011 4:19 PM
I like Graham Couch, but it is amazing and absurd that EMU is not mentioned in the piece as a major catalyst for these new stipulations.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 5/16/2011 4:24 PM
Bobcat Love wrote:expand_more
I like Graham Couch, but it is amazing and absurd that EMU is not mentioned in the piece as a major catalyst for these new stipulations.


It's funny that he rips Akron and Kent State a couple times but goes out of his way to not mention Eastern and Central.
Ted Thompson
Administrator
Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: MAC Play
Post Count: 7,950
mail
Ted Thompson
mail
Posted: 5/16/2011 4:47 PM
I love this, it's what I've been looking for. Basically, a fine system. You just don't give them the money instead of taking it away. I think attendance minimums should be part of this as well. Because it is going to take a fan base to change the revenue side of the equation.
Jeff McKinney
Moderator
JM
Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,163
person
mail
Jeff McKinney
mail
Posted: 5/16/2011 5:04 PM
If maybe two programs in the MAC could dramatically turn things around quickly, this would be a catalyst toward the whole league moving in the right direction.  Look at the Horizon League with Butler. 
Pete Chouteau
General User
Member Since: 11/17/2004
Location: You Can't See Me
Post Count: 1,696
mail
Pete Chouteau
mail
Posted: 5/16/2011 9:21 PM
What are the chances that this has greater detriment to non-revenue sports than to the intended targets here?

Jus' axin.
Ohio69
General User
O69
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 3,124
person
mail
Ohio69
mail
Posted: 5/17/2011 12:42 PM
Pete Chouteau wrote:expand_more
What are the chances that this has greater detriment to non-revenue sports than to the intended targets here? Jus' axin.


I'm guessing 100% for the teams that bring in less money due to the new rules.

I wonder if there's anything regarding graduation rates in those formulas.
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 5/17/2011 1:03 PM
Ted Thompson wrote:expand_more
I think attendance minimums should be part of this as well. Because it is going to take a fan base to change the revenue side of the equation.


Disagree. It would take a significant increase in attendance to make a noticeable bump in revenue, and that's not realistic at this time. It's also a variable that is much more out of control of the schools than scheduling, winning, RPI, etc.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 5/17/2011 3:48 PM
JSF wrote:expand_more
I think attendance minimums should be part of this as well. Because it is going to take a fan base to change the revenue side of the equation.


Disagree. It would take a significant increase in attendance to make a noticeable bump in revenue, and that's not realistic at this time. It's also a variable that is much more out of control of the schools than scheduling, winning, RPI, etc.


Plus Eastern Michigan's attendance doesn't directly affect Ohio and the rest of the MAC schools. RPI and competitiveness do.
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 5/17/2011 10:46 PM
Kinda the opposite of sports drafts in which the worst teams get the top picks.  Here the worst performers get the salt.
KyleWvr13
General User
Member Since: 11/10/2010
Location: Pottstown, PA
Post Count: 503
mail
KyleWvr13
mail
Posted: 5/18/2011 3:11 AM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
Kinda the opposite of sports drafts in which the worst teams get the top picks.  Here the worst performers get the salt.


As much as i love the idea of rewarding the top teams every year, this does create the potential of a WAC (football wise) scenario, where there are 2 or maybe 3 elite teams, and the rest are left in the dust.
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 5/18/2011 8:21 AM
KyleWvr13 wrote:expand_more
Kinda the opposite of sports drafts in which the worst teams get the top picks.  Here the worst performers get the salt.


As much as i love the idea of rewarding the top teams every year, this does create the potential of a WAC (football wise) scenario, where there are 2 or maybe 3 elite teams, and the rest are left in the dust.

That would be a pretty major improvement to what we have now...
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 5/18/2011 10:56 AM
anorris wrote:expand_more
Kinda the opposite of sports drafts in which the worst teams get the top picks.  Here the worst performers get the salt.


As much as i love the idea of rewarding the top teams every year, this does create the potential of a WAC (football wise) scenario, where there are 2 or maybe 3 elite teams, and the rest are left in the dust.

That would be a pretty major improvement to what we have now...


Yeah. As much as I like the idea of spreading the money out equally, that's not working. We need to try something else. Schools are not equally interested in being competitive, so they shouldn't be treated equally. Even if that makes me sound like a Republican.

(I think the better answer is for the money to be spread out equally among ALL NCAA schools and establish a spending ceiling and floor.)
Last Edited: 5/18/2011 10:57:32 AM by JSF
Athens
General User
A
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,454
person
mail
Athens
mail
Posted: 5/18/2011 11:14 AM
JSF wrote:expand_more
I think attendance minimums should be part of this as well. Because it is going to take a fan base to change the revenue side of the equation.


Disagree. It would take a significant increase in attendance to make a noticeable bump in revenue, and that's not realistic at this time. It's also a variable that is much more out of control of the schools than scheduling, winning, RPI, etc.


I agree. As long as the program has a high level of funding attendance doesn't really matter.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,708
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 5/18/2011 9:19 PM
KyleWvr13 wrote:expand_more
Kinda the opposite of sports drafts in which the worst teams get the top picks.  Here the worst performers get the salt.


As much as i love the idea of rewarding the top teams every year, this does create the potential of a WAC (football wise) scenario, where there are 2 or maybe 3 elite teams, and the rest are left in the dust.


As long as OHIO is one of those elite teams, I think it's a good plan! 

JSF, I like it when you talk Republican.  And, I'll take your logic one step further and ask the following provocative question: Should Title IX continue to be enforced on the assumption that equal percentages of male and female students desire to participate in intercollegiate athletics?   
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 5/18/2011 11:26 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Kinda the opposite of sports drafts in which the worst teams get the top picks.  Here the worst performers get the salt.


As much as i love the idea of rewarding the top teams every year, this does create the potential of a WAC (football wise) scenario, where there are 2 or maybe 3 elite teams, and the rest are left in the dust.


As long as OHIO is one of those elite teams, I think it's a good plan! 

JSF, I like it when you talk Republican.  And, I'll take your logic one step further and ask the following provocative question: Should Title IX continue to be enforced on the assumption that equal percentages of male and female students desire to participate in intercollegiate athletics?   


The question to your question is whether that's the assumption. I don't think it is. It's an inelegant way of imposing equal opportunity, and I would rather have it or not. I am very open to an alternative to Title IX, but there has to be some way of ensuring that opportunity exists. I do think it's used as a scapegoat much more than it truly deserves blame.

We also have to consider whether we've reached the endgame of what Title IX was trying to accomplish. Whether or not people like it, I think we can agree it was a forward-thinking idea, and there are precious few of those coming out of our government.
Last Edited: 5/19/2011 8:29:40 AM by JSF
Jeff McKinney
Moderator
JM
Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,163
person
mail
Jeff McKinney
mail
Posted: 5/19/2011 10:40 AM
Good news, guys!  The Siberian Express has extended its lines out to Lavrentia, Chukotk.  You'll love it there!  On a clear day you can see Sarah Palin's house!

Lavrentia 2006 
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 5/19/2011 4:08 PM
The folks over at the Miami board are asking if the conference has enough money to make it worth a school's while to actually change scheduling. It's a legitimate question.
Jeff McKinney
Moderator
JM
Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,163
person
mail
Jeff McKinney
mail
Posted: 5/19/2011 4:24 PM
I agree that's a good question.  That's why I posted earlier that this is a step in the right direction but certainly not a panacea for what ails basketball in this league. 
giacomo
General User
G
Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,764
person
mail
giacomo
mail
Posted: 5/19/2011 4:46 PM
You have to WANT to be good. Any of you that run a business or own one. Do you spend more money to get better or spend less?
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 5/19/2011 9:10 PM
JSF wrote:expand_more
The folks over at the Miami board are asking if the conference has enough money to make it worth a school's while to actually change scheduling. It's a legitimate question.
It is a good question.  The best thing that could happen would be to accrue a couple extra win shares over the next few years to bump up the coffers.
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 5/19/2011 10:23 PM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
Do you spend more money to get better or spend less?


Well, the answer depends on the situation.
Showing Messages: 1 - 25 of 27



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)