menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Looks like Christmas is coming sooner for a lot of you...
Page: 2 of 8
mail
person
Pataskala
7/24/2013 7:22 AM
All this talk by the money conferences of creating their own division really undercuts their arguments against allowing a for-profit school into D1.  What a bunch of f'ing hypocrites.
mail
person
1stInConvo
7/24/2013 9:16 AM
Last Edited: 7/24/2013 9:21:02 AM by 1stInConvo
mail
Bobcatbob
7/24/2013 10:10 AM
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
All this talk by the money conferences of creating their own division really undercuts their arguments against allowing a for-profit school into D1.  What a bunch of f'ing hypocrites.


Bingo!  I laughed out loud when i read abut the sanctimonious PAC-12 wringing their hands over this stuff.  Do these guys ever listen to themselves talk?

As for the re-making of college football, it's just one more step toward self-destruction.  Whether it's the courts or Congress, some reform minded AD somewhere or even their competitor, the NFL, the more they exert and extort the power of TV money the more they invite intervention.  It's only a matter of time.
mail
person
colobobcat66
7/24/2013 10:21 AM
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
I for one don't believe we have lost the arms race. What does this so-called arms race get you? Million-dollar coaches and fancy locker rooms? That's it. It's not like the Yankees v. the Royals where the rich can just buy the best players. For the most part, the bells and whistles entice the elite, but not always. Where did the #1 player in the NFL draft play last year? Central Michigan. The MAC had a team in the Orange Bowl last year and several teams ranked. If the bigs can split, they will, but they'll have to establish some sort of criteria and it will be very hard to do so without eliminating some of the teams from their own conferences.
from my perspective , it's a lot more than that, everything from recruiting budgets, weight rooms, medical care, travel conditions,, team dorms and team training tables,ad infinitum. I hear you on the fact that they don't get all the best players, but we're talking about high school kids evaluations. A MAC team in the Orange Bowl had very little to do with them deserving that opportunity, but it was nice to see, you'll never See it again. Not saying all this is a lot better for the players, but most is preferable to things like overnight flights etc.
Last Edited: 7/24/2013 10:41:42 AM by colobobcat66
mail
The Optimist
7/24/2013 10:29 AM

There is no reason to think the MAC cannot return to a BCS bowl this year. I'm not saying it's a sure thing, but if the right team is the MAC champ at 1 loss there is a very good chance that is good enough to get in this year. Let alone if the MAC can win some key OOC games...

mail
person
colobobcat66
7/24/2013 10:42 AM
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
There is no reason to think the MAC cannot return to a BCS bowl this year. I'm not saying it's a sure thing, but if the right team is the MAC champ at 1 loss there is a very good chance that is good enough to get in this year. Let alone if the MAC can win some key OOC games...
yeah, this year, thereafter sounds like its totally stacked against it.
Last Edited: 7/24/2013 11:11:18 AM by colobobcat66
mail
person
cbarber357
7/24/2013 11:34 AM
From what I understand the Group of Five team with best record will get into one of the bowls, possibly more teams?
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
7/24/2013 1:11 PM
Mark Lembright '85 wrote:expand_more

My theory is this: Ohio being relegated to a different/lower conference is a bad thing only in our minds and in our minds only, it really doesn't change reality.  Hang in there with me on this.

What does this division reclassification really mean for Ohio?  How does this change things?  I think it doesn't, except in our own perception.  Our schedule mainly consists of MAC competition now anyway and that won't change.  We will still get to play one big AQ team a year-like another poster said, the AQs have to schedule us non-AQs occasionally just to complete their schedule.  So I see our schedule still basically staying the same.  Our bowl possibilities will probably stay the same.  There was a quote in today's Cleveland Plain Dealer that there could be upwards of 40 bowls in 2014 and afterwards!  We still should be able to have the bowl experiences afforded by Mobile, ALA, Shreveport, LA, New Orleans, etc.

I see what Mike's saying but I posit this: once we get over the shock of not being in the elitist of elistist football divisions we will find out that our football experience won't change a bit, at least not for the negative. 

That being said, I could be very wrong.  It's all semantics anyway-football as we know it won't exist within the next 30 years given what we're finding out about the damage concussions caused by football does to the players that play it.



I would argue that the Ohio University student body would get far more excited over a home final four game against, say, Richmond in the FCS playoffs than they'll ever be for a game against Troy State in Mobile in December.
mail
person
Ohio69
7/24/2013 2:18 PM
Mark Lembright '85 wrote:expand_more

My theory is this: Ohio being relegated to a different/lower conference is a bad thing only in our minds and in our minds only, it really doesn't change reality.  Hang in there with me on this.

What does this division reclassification really mean for Ohio?  How does this change things?  I think it doesn't, except in our own perception.  Our schedule mainly consists of MAC competition now anyway and that won't change.  We will still get to play one big AQ team a year-like another poster said, the AQs have to schedule us non-AQs occasionally just to complete their schedule.  So I see our schedule still basically staying the same.  Our bowl possibilities will probably stay the same.  There was a quote in today's Cleveland Plain Dealer that there could be upwards of 40 bowls in 2014 and afterwards!  We still should be able to have the bowl experiences afforded by Mobile, ALA, Shreveport, LA, New Orleans, etc.

I see what Mike's saying but I posit this: once we get over the shock of not being in the elitist of elistist football divisions we will find out that our football experience won't change a bit, at least not for the negative. 

That being said, I could be very wrong.  It's all semantics anyway-football as we know it won't exist within the next 30 years given what we're finding out about the damage concussions caused by football does to the players that play it.





Northern Illinois played in the Orange Bowl last year.  That could have easily been Ohio.  So, being relegated would change reality greatly, and not just in my mind.  I just left a meeting with two guys from Cleveland with no connection to Ohio football who just asked me if I think we could make the BCS like Northern Illinois.  Its bumming me out that just as we start to be part of that BCS buster conversation, things could change.
Last Edited: 7/24/2013 2:23:02 PM by Ohio69
mail
The Optimist
7/24/2013 2:43 PM

colobobcat66 wrote:expand_more
There is no reason to think the MAC cannot return to a BCS bowl this year. I'm not saying it's a sure thing, but if the right team is the MAC champ at 1 loss there is a very good chance that is good enough to get in this year. Let alone if the MAC can win some key OOC games...
yeah, this year, thereafter sounds like its totally stacked against it.

 

Fair enough... Your original comment said "never" again which is why I posted seeing that the MAC has a very real opportunity to be in the BCS for the 2nd straight year.

Like Ohio69, I really am hard pressed to complain about the current setup when its very clear Ohio can make a BCS game if they get it done on the field. Doesn't sound like all that much of a "have-not" to me. We were in the freaking Top 25 last year! Get it done on the field this year and we are positioning this program significantly well for the upcoming changes in the system.

mail
person
Mark Lembright '85
7/24/2013 4:43 PM
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more

My theory is this: Ohio being relegated to a different/lower conference is a bad thing only in our minds and in our minds only, it really doesn't change reality.  Hang in there with me on this.

What does this division reclassification really mean for Ohio?  How does this change things?  I think it doesn't, except in our own perception.  Our schedule mainly consists of MAC competition now anyway and that won't change.  We will still get to play one big AQ team a year-like another poster said, the AQs have to schedule us non-AQs occasionally just to complete their schedule.  So I see our schedule still basically staying the same.  Our bowl possibilities will probably stay the same.  There was a quote in today's Cleveland Plain Dealer that there could be upwards of 40 bowls in 2014 and afterwards!  We still should be able to have the bowl experiences afforded by Mobile, ALA, Shreveport, LA, New Orleans, etc.

I see what Mike's saying but I posit this: once we get over the shock of not being in the elitist of elistist football divisions we will find out that our football experience won't change a bit, at least not for the negative. 

That being said, I could be very wrong.  It's all semantics anyway-football as we know it won't exist within the next 30 years given what we're finding out about the damage concussions caused by football does to the players that play it.





Northern Illinois played in the Orange Bowl last year.  That could have easily been Ohio.  So, being relegated would change reality greatly, and not just in my mind.  I just left a meeting with two guys from Cleveland with no connection to Ohio football who just asked me if I think we could make the BCS like Northern Illinois.  Its bumming me out that just as we start to be part of that BCS buster conversation, things could change.


I see what you're saying, Ohio69 and agree somewhat but the cynic in me says you've proved my point.  Reality is, Ohio didn't almost make the Orange Bowl as it lost 4 games.  We didn't even finish second in the MAC East last year, so I would say we were nowhere close to making the Orange Bowl.  Yes we had injuries (debilitating I would say) but that's part of the game-everyone has injuries to some extent.  And that's what separates us and the MAC from the Big 5 conferences, depth.  I guarantee you, if Northern Illinois had the rash of injuries we had, they wouldn't have sniffed the Orange Bowl.  So in a sense, what the AQ conferences want to do is just stating the way things are in college football to me.
 
I hate to say it, as I really love football much more than basketball, but in this world of limited resources, I'm starting to concur more and more with the basketball posters that think we're better off dedicating more $$ to hoops than football as we can get a much better return on our resources.  As much as I love Coach Solich (yes, I have a man-crush on that guy) nothing Ohio football's done in the last 10 years, from improbable wins over Pitt and Penn State to our first bowl victories, truly compares to our Sweet 16 run in 2012
and all the positive publicity that it entailed.  Don't get me wrong, I LOVE  Ohio football and what Ohio's accomplished under Coach Solich but if we're looking to maximize Ohio as a brand, if we want to be able to compete at the highest/elistist of athletic levels, I think Ohio has a much better opportunity to do it in basketball than football.
Last Edited: 7/24/2013 4:44:26 PM by Mark Lembright '85
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
7/24/2013 7:48 PM

Good post, Mark L.

Let me play devil's advocate.  Isn't your argument true for any school--it takes less budget to compete in hoops than football.  Given that there are about 3 times as many hoop teams as football teams, maybe football is a good way to go.  I suppose one has to factor in the value of making the NCAA's vs. making a BCS bowl.  I don't know the answer...just providing a different perspective.

mail
person
Mark Lembright '85
7/24/2013 9:35 PM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more

Good post, Mark L.

Let me play devil's advocate.  Isn't your argument true for any school--it takes less budget to compete in hoops than football.  Given that there are about 3 times as many hoop teams as football teams, maybe football is a good way to go.  I suppose one has to factor in the value of making the NCAA's vs. making a BCS bowl.  I don't know the answer...just providing a different perspective.



Hi Monroe.  You have a good point.  Where Ohio is better positioned though is in basketball, at least as far as facilities are concerned.  The Convo could use some sprucing up but it's basically as good an arena as is possible when one considers the overall population of SE Ohio-it seats nearly 14,000.  The locker room's just been redone.  If Ohio can magically come up with the $ for its own IPF then it's facilities will be nearly as good as most of the top hoops teams in the country (with the exceptions being the true blue bloods of hoops-Louisville, Kentucky, UNC).  And, Ohio has a recent history of successfully competing at the highest levels in hoops, as demonstrated by its 3 NCAA Tourney wins since 2010.

To be able to say the same thing about football would take a capital expenditure the likes of which we could only dream.  Please keep in mind, when I talk about football I realize that Ohio has the occasional ability already to beat  an AQ team.  I'm referring more to what it would take for Ohio to compete consistently, 12-13 games a year against AQ teams, at an SEC, PAC 10, Big 12 level.  Univ. of Cincinnati wants to spend $75 million to upgrade Nippert Stadium just to try and keep up-yikes!
mail
CATman
7/24/2013 11:09 PM
Just out of curiosity, what are the economics of this? 

Realistically, how much money gets cut out of a football budget if D-1 is no longer the highest division? Half? 

I would assume scholarship limits would drop and without the prospect of pure money games (with AQ's refusing to play anyone outside the division) does football even make sense from a budgetary standpoint? 

As others have said, given the success of the basketball team and the longterm opportunities there, it would probably be prudent to allocate the funds to basketball vs. keeping a second tier football program going. 

I disagree with posters that think this would be anything other than a huge bomb for the program in general. 

What small TV contracts the MAC has (in football) will go away, Ohio will rarely ever play on TV (if at all), they'll never play a big time opponent again (PSU still sucks) and they'll still be sinking a bunch of money in to keeping it going. 

I love football but the whole thing is a bit disheartening. A plan to cut out over half of the D-1 football teams doesn't exactly align with the spirit of college athletics. 



mail
person
Robert Fox
7/25/2013 9:42 AM
You have to also consider the loss of football fans from the equation. How many fans will simply stop supporting the athletics department with the drop, or loss, of football? I like football far more than basketball. My dollar contribution would certainly change dramatically.
mail
person
Piney
7/25/2013 12:53 PM
CATman wrote:expand_more
Just out of curiosity, what are the economics of this? 

Realistically, how much money gets cut out of a football budget if D-1 is no longer the highest division? Half? 

I would assume scholarship limits would drop and without the prospect of pure money games (with AQ's refusing to play anyone outside the division) does football even make sense from a budgetary standpoint? 

As others have said, given the success of the basketball team and the longterm opportunities there, it would probably be prudent to allocate the funds to basketball vs. keeping a second tier football program going. 

I disagree with posters that think this would be anything other than a huge bomb for the program in general. 

What small TV contracts the MAC has (in football) will go away, Ohio will rarely ever play on TV (if at all), they'll never play a big time opponent again (PSU still sucks) and they'll still be sinking a bunch of money in to keeping it going. 

I love football but the whole thing is a bit disheartening. A plan to cut out over half of the D-1 football teams doesn't exactly align with the spirit of college athletics. 





I agree... this could be a huge bomb to Ohio athletics. And what people aren't discussing here and not on the basketball board yet is the impact on basketball.

While football is headlining this, basketball is included as well. The big money programs want to pay ALL of their student athletes. It will be interesting to see what happens on the basketball side if this football split occurs. Would the big money programs be allowed to play by different rules by paying their basketball players and recruit differently and still have the NCAA tourney as we see it? Or will they have to break away and then the current NCAA basketball tournament becomes the NIT???
mail
person
ou79
7/25/2013 5:49 PM
Thank you Piney, because that is what I took away from the article.  I thought I misread the article because what I was getting is that the Big 5 (ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12 and PAC 12) want a separate conference/tourney for only their group and no one else in both football and basketball.  They want to pay all of their athletes across the board.  My read was that they wanted to get rid of the 340+ D-I teams in basketball as well.  If that happens,  then not only does the football program take a dive, but the basketball program does as well. 

So, if that is true and does happen then some of you will probably be happy watching Ohio play the Ivy League teams in not only football but basketball as well.  What is good for the goose is good for the gander.  We can all have fun watching the basketball team host such teams as UNC Ashville and Eastern Kentucky on a regular basis.  As a matter of fact, perhaps we could try to get into the Ohio Athletic Conference for all you college sport purists and trash the athletic budget completely.  Think of the money we could save by only having to travel in state and especially locally to either Marietta or Muskingum.  I am sure the student body and fans would pack Peden and the Convo for those games.

Or, we can take measures to move out of the MAC and into a better conference.  However, for those who still think we would only have to do that in basketball if at all, you may be wrong.  What I took away from the article is that the so-called "bigs" want a commitment across the board in all sports.  If so, that leaves your basketball only argument sucking wind.
mail
person
Mark Lembright '85
7/25/2013 9:57 PM
ou79 wrote:expand_more
Thank you Piney, because that is what I took away from the article.  I thought I misread the article because what I was getting is that the Big 5 (ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12 and PAC 12) want a separate conference/tourney for only their group and no one else in both football and basketball.  They want to pay all of their athletes across the board.  My read was that they wanted to get rid of the 340+ D-I teams in basketball as well.  If that happens,  then not only does the football program take a dive, but the basketball program does as well. 

So, if that is true and does happen then some of you will probably be happy watching Ohio play the Ivy League teams in not only football but basketball as well.  What is good for the goose is good for the gander.  We can all have fun watching the basketball team host such teams as UNC Ashville and Eastern Kentucky on a regular basis.  As a matter of fact, perhaps we could try to get into the Ohio Athletic Conference for all you college sport purists and trash the athletic budget completely.  Think of the money we could save by only having to travel in state and especially locally to either Marietta or Muskingum.  I am sure the student body and fans would pack Peden and the Convo for those games.

Or, we can take measures to move out of the MAC and into a better conference.  However, for those who still think we would only have to do that in basketball if at all, you may be wrong.  What I took away from the article is that the so-called "bigs" want a commitment across the board in all sports.  If so, that leaves your basketball only argument sucking wind.


OK OU79, exactly where is Ohio going to get at least $50 million (minimum!) to move into another conference (which presumes there's a Big 5 conference that actually wants to invite Ohio)?  Think that figure is an exaggeration?  Akron spent over $60 million on Infocision Stadium and UC wants to spend another $75 million to upgrade its stadium!   And Cinci's not even in a Big 5 conference yet.
mail
person
ou79
7/25/2013 10:08 PM
Easy, the same place Akron got its money.  Peden is as much a part of State property as any other facility on campus.  Also, if we are spending a  billion dollars to renovate/redo the campus, we can just as easily reassign or redesignate some of that towards Peden. 
mail
person
Mark Lembright '85
7/25/2013 10:18 PM
ou79 wrote:expand_more
Easy, the same place Akron got its money.  Peden is as much a part of State property as any other facility on campus.  Also, if we are spending a  billion dollars to renovate/redo the campus, we can just as easily reassign or redesignate some of that towards Peden. 


If what SBH says is true, and I think he's right, Akron's in a world of financial hurt right now as they are really struggling under their debt burden.  And I know it's been said that's there  is supposed to be $1,000,000,000 of new construction on Ohio's campus, but I will believe it when I see it.  I'm not sure the State of Ohio has officially and irrevocably allocated that $ to Ohio University just yet.  I hope it happens but we'll see.
mail
The Situation
7/25/2013 10:50 PM
These pro-pay-the-athletes-dolts are so one-dimensional. They talk revenue sharing as if we'd come to watch them play at the park on a Wednesday afternoon.
  • Will donors get a return on their investment based on the athletics department's annual revenue?
  • Will students who make a mandatory investment in athletics through the general fee get a return on their investment? Will they get to waive that portion of their fee (I mean since the athletes do it all by themselves after all)? 
  • Taxpayers? You've got to be kidding me if you don't include the taxpayers.
  • What percentage of the athlete's salary is owed to the athletic department's capital outlay?
  • How can you prove that someone purchased the jersey number for an athlete and not because it is their graduation year, or favorite number? When does an athlete stop getting credit for jersey sales and who gets to wear the number thereafter considering the strategic play for royalties?
And
  • IF you pay college athletes, can you pay high school athletes? Can agents just roam free?
  • Is there an "amateurism" clause if you pay the athletes? Can your program take on minor leaguers or ex-pros who couldn't cut it in the big leagues?
  • If Wake Forest is "so much bigger" than Ohio University that they have "functionally different" problems, objectively how long until Texas is "too big" for Wake Forest? 
Last Edited: 7/25/2013 10:51:27 PM by The Situation
mail
person
Urban Bobcat
7/25/2013 10:54 PM
Basically the Big Conferences are more or less going pro.    

I will still watch Ohio Football and perhaps a few other teams in their Division.

As far as the Professional Conferences I will not bother to view.

I will watch the NFL if I want to watch pro football.


mail
person
Casper71
7/26/2013 12:50 PM
Wow, this is going to get really ugly really quick, I think.

Bottom line is your Akron's and Cincinnati's really WANT to be in the Big 5 and are at least making a monetary committment to the necessary facilities.  The question for them is: do the Big 5 WANT either one of them?  My guess is Cincy gets in next go round.  They have the Basketball tradition and they have thrown a ton of money Football's way to at least be in the discussion.  Akron, not so sure given their past and current situations. 

As for my dear old OHIO, I have come to the realization we do not have the financial resources and cannot make the monetary committment necessary to make the jump.  We probably go back to 1960 and maybe become the "small college" champs.

Kinda disappointing when you look at how far we've come from the "dark years" in football but that is the reality of the situation.
mail
The Situation
7/26/2013 2:08 PM
I genuinely don't understand the defeatist attitude on here by a lot of you guys. What they are proposing is so functionally disfunctional that it can't work in practice. The return of prohibition or a conversion of the U.S. to the metric system are much more plausible. Really this is just a bunch of baboons in suits fighting over a bananna that was given to them by the zoo keeper.
mail
person
Day Tripper
7/26/2013 2:33 PM
What about traditional basketball schools that don't have football teams?  I can't believe that Missouri Valley, Big East and Atlantic 10 teams would be left out the Big Dance just because they don't have DI footbal team. 
Showing Messages: 26 - 50 of 184
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



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