Choate has said this all along.

[bobcat99]

And perhaps the money is better spent elsewhere than on sports.

[Cataholic]

What is not mentioned is what sort of priority is Jackson State putting on football.

Some of this uneven playing field is the effort each school puts into football program and much of that requires money.
So yes the large schools will have more resources to put into football, but don't sit back and wine about how unfair it is. Life is unfair.

Dieon needs to get the school, alum, and boosters to commit to improving the program. He needs them to buy into his vison to improve the team and its facilities. Not complain how unfair it is and that the large schools should be forced to share their resources with a smaller school. That is where the socialism argument comes into play.

and yes the NCAA does heavily favors the power 5 conferences. What did Dieon expect when he went to Jackson State?

What confuses me is that the HBCUs traditionally have large stadiums with large attendance numbers, but yet are unable to commit to improving the program with that resource. They should be rolling in monetary funds with the attendance numbers they brag about, but yet they seem to be broke.

Most HBCU’s do not have good financial status. Grambling only has enrollment of about 5,000. Their stadium only seats 18,000 and is way behind MSU. The stadium probably is comparable to Weber, except Weber is nicer with better supporting facilities. If you have ever been to the city of Grambling, you understand how tough it would be to recruit kids for anything. The city is only about 5,000 in population. It’s neighbor is Ruston (population of 20,000) where Louisiana Tech is located and they have a 40,000 seat stadium. The two cities combined are smaller than Butte. I have been to the city of Grambling and would compare it to the city of Manhattan or Whitehall.

Deion should have known what he was getting into.

How exactly do you propose that HCBUs fundraiser from boosters & alum? HCBUs are a relic of Jim Crow “Separate but impoverished”.

The Ohios and Alabamas...and he’ll, even the Montanas of the world have alum & booster networks to pull from that HCBUs might be able to dream of in another 6-8 generations.

This, exactly this. They're a historically under-served group of institutions that gave black students often their only opportunity at higher education. They're not brimming with billionaire alumni. There's no way a Jackson state, a Grambling, etc could ever commit the resources to football that we do, um does, ndsu does, never mind the big schools. Their challenges are more similar to northern Colorado, suu, Portland state; forgotten state-affilliated schools with way bigger brothers to compete with.

While Deion wants to produce NFL football players, that is not really the mission at HBCU’s. The football team does provide a way for some kids to go to college and have it paid for. That is a great thing! Making a big time football program in a tiny little city is not realistic. According to Wikipedia (I am too lazy to check if accurate) the endowment at Grambling is only $4.5 million. The endowment at Montana Tech is over $40 million.

[GavinDonos]

Regulation isn't the same as socialism. Just to be clear. We are dealing with a private organization (NCAA) that is supposed to be the steward of fair competition among it's membership. In that case regulation isn't necessarily a bad thing, in my opinion.

All of the professional sports regulate their terms of engagement. Big markets still hold an advantage, but small markets still have a fighting chance. If you're an organization that executes more effectively than others, or are historically more appealing than others, then that is a fair advantage. If you've simply got mountains of money than everyone else and that is your only reason for succeeding on the playing field, then it degrades the integrity of the sport itself.

I've got a feeling that Alabama would still be piling up national championships simply based on their model of operation, coaching personnel, and legacy... no shame there.

I'm not a fan of socialism, but I am a fan of parity via regulation when it comes to things like college athletics.

How do you regulate it?

You can only sign so many 5 star recruits?

You can only spend so much money?

You can only have so many weights and power racks?

A fancy gym doesn’t make for a better player than a run down gym with the proper equipment. TV’s in every locker doesn’t make for better players, they’re just recruitment tools.

Okay, I'm going to break off a lot of scattered thoughts here... but I'm at work and don't necessarily know where exactly I stand on this issue as far as the "big picture" goes... so change my mind!

Setting a spending cap on NCAA athletics would be a good place to start. Do you have a problem with salary caps? The Patriots aren't a traditional "big market" team, yet they dominated for 20 years existing within strict operational limits. Now that their talent has declined, they aren't anywhere near the organization they used to be... parity. There are teams emerging in the NFL that weren't in the discussion 3-5 years ago. They're all still allowed to spend the same amount of money on resources. It comes down to how well they execute their plan.

The Oakland A's shouldn't stand a chance in MLB, yet they consistently have winning teams and fight in the playoffs. They aren't even able to spend as much money on talent as 9/10 of their competitors, but they are able to find the talent. Is it because they are lucky, or do they just execute their plan better? Granted, the big money teams end up clobbering them in the end, but at least they're competitive.

You regulate by setting limits on excess spending. Competitive sports are not a free-market product. This holds true in professional athletics, and I don't see why it shouldn't hold true in amateur athletics as well.

I get it. I'm just dreaming here. I like it when schools like Cincinnati, UCF, Boise State, etc. think they can compete with the Power 5 schools... I just get a little depressed when that situation only happens every 5-6 years and they still end up getting shut out because their portfolio isn't large enough. It takes a little bit of fun out of the game.

Recruit as many 5 star players as you can, that isn't the issue.

And to be clear, I'm more of a conservative meritocrat as opposed to a socialist... Talent is talent, and should be celebrated and recognized. I just don't like it when it becomes the main perk of a stacked system that is designed to keep the powerful in place. That isn't a free market either, that's a dictatorship.

Alas, on the flipside, against my own argument we have schools like Notre Dame, who has perhaps the biggest athletic endowment in the world, yet still craps their pants every time they play in a National marquee game. Michigan who has more money than God, yet can't sniff a conference championship let alone a playoff birth... maybe I'm just thinking about this too hard. I just get tired of seeing the same 6 f*ckers playing for the title every year. Maybe we just need to expand the playoffs... then I'll be happy!

I apologize for the long post! I can't blame anyone for not reading the whole thing... I guess I'm just feeling a little bit of Prime Time's frustration on this.

[coloradocat]

Regulation isn't the same as socialism. Just to be clear. We are dealing with a private organization (NCAA) that is supposed to be the steward of fair competition among it's membership. In that case regulation isn't necessarily a bad thing, in my opinion.

All of the professional sports regulate their terms of engagement. Big markets still hold an advantage, but small markets still have a fighting chance. If you're an organization that executes more effectively than others, or are historically more appealing than others, then that is a fair advantage. If you've simply got mountains of money than everyone else and that is your only reason for succeeding on the playing field, then it degrades the integrity of the sport itself.

I've got a feeling that Alabama would still be piling up national championships simply based on their model of operation, coaching personnel, and legacy... no shame there.

I'm not a fan of socialism, but I am a fan of parity via regulation when it comes to things like college athletics.

How do you regulate it?

You can only sign so many 5 star recruits?

You can only spend so much money?

You can only have so many weights and power racks?

A fancy gym doesn’t make for a better player than a run down gym with the proper equipment. TV’s in every locker doesn’t make for better players, they’re just recruitment tools.

Okay, I'm going to break off a lot of scattered thoughts here... but I'm at work and don't necessarily know where exactly I stand on this issue as far as the "big picture" goes... so change my mind!

Setting a spending cap on NCAA athletics would be a good place to start. Do you have a problem with salary caps? The Patriots aren't a traditional "big market" team, yet they dominated for 20 years existing within strict operational limits. Now that their talent has declined, they aren't anywhere near the organization they used to be... parity. There are teams emerging in the NFL that weren't in the discussion 3-5 years ago. They're all still allowed to spend the same amount of money on resources. It comes down to how well they execute their plan.

The Oakland A's shouldn't stand a chance in MLB, yet they consistently have winning teams and fight in the playoffs. They aren't even able to spend as much money on talent as 9/10 of their competitors, but they are able to find the talent. Is it because they are lucky, or do they just execute their plan better? Granted, the big money teams end up clobbering them in the end, but at least they're competitive.

You regulate by setting limits on excess spending. Competitive sports are not a free-market product. This holds true in professional athletics, and I don't see why it shouldn't hold true in amateur athletics as well.

I get it. I'm just dreaming here. I like it when schools like Cincinnati, UCF, Boise State, etc. think they can compete with the Power 5 schools... I just get a little depressed when that situation only happens every 5-6 years and they still end up getting shut out because their portfolio isn't large enough. It takes a little bit of fun out of the game.

Recruit as many 5 star players as you can, that isn't the issue.

And to be clear, I'm more of a conservative meritocrat as opposed to a socialist... Talent is talent, and should be celebrated and recognized. I just don't like it when it becomes the main perk of a stacked system that is designed to keep the powerful in place. That isn't a free market either, that's a dictatorship.

Alas, on the flipside, against my own argument we have schools like Notre Dame, who has perhaps the biggest athletic endowment in the world, yet still craps their pants every time they play in a National marquee game. Michigan who has more money than God, yet can't sniff a conference championship let alone a playoff birth... maybe I'm just thinking about this too hard. I just get tired of seeing the same 6 f*ckers playing for the title every year. Maybe we just need to expand the playoffs... then I'll be happy!

I apologize for the long post! I can't blame anyone for not reading the whole thing... I guess I'm just feeling a little bit of Prime Time's frustration on this.

The reason pro leagues have parity with salary caps is that everyone involved starts out rich so there is some degree of parity to begin with. Even with salary caps it's only the salary that is impacted. There's variety in how much teams spend on front office, facilities, etc. There's a much wider range of financial health among universities (at any level).

If you set a cap on college spending it would have to be against the full budget and be sport by sport. Even then, what amount would make sense? It would probably have to be whatever an above average G5 school spends because if it's more than that you haven't fixed anything. The problem with that is the top P5 schools wouldn't go along with that.

My solution is for a realignment of the levels of football. I've mentioned this on another thread but I think it should be FBS (P5), FCS (G5 + top half of FCS), DII (DII + bottom half of FCS). The FCS has a similar issue to the FBS in that there are definitely schools that don't have a real chance and would be better off financially dropping down. With this model, each level is much more financially equal across the member schools.

[BleedingBLue]

And the HBCUs have now sued the NCAA for being racist.

[GoldstoneCat]

What is not mentioned is what sort of priority is Jackson State putting on football.

Some of this uneven playing field is the effort each school puts into football program and much of that requires money.
So yes the large schools will have more resources to put into football, but don't sit back and wine about how unfair it is. Life is unfair.

Dieon needs to get the school, alum, and boosters to commit to improving the program. He needs them to buy into his vison to improve the team and its facilities. Not complain how unfair it is and that the large schools should be forced to share their resources with a smaller school. That is where the socialism argument comes into play.

and yes the NCAA does heavily favors the power 5 conferences. What did Dieon expect when he went to Jackson State?

What confuses me is that the HBCUs traditionally have large stadiums with large attendance numbers, but yet are unable to commit to improving the program with that resource. They should be rolling in monetary funds with the attendance numbers they brag about, but yet they seem to be broke.

Most HBCU’s do not have good financial status. Grambling only has enrollment of about 5,000. Their stadium only seats 18,000 and is way behind MSU. The stadium probably is comparable to Weber, except Weber is nicer with better supporting facilities. If you have ever been to the city of Grambling, you understand how tough it would be to recruit kids for anything. The city is only about 5,000 in population. It’s neighbor is Ruston (population of 20,000) where Louisiana Tech is located and they have a 40,000 seat stadium. The two cities combined are smaller than Butte. I have been to the city of Grambling and would compare it to the city of Manhattan or Whitehall.

Deion should have known what he was getting into.

How exactly do you propose that HCBUs fundraiser from boosters & alum? HCBUs are a relic of Jim Crow “Separate but impoverished”.

The Ohios and Alabamas...and he’ll, even the Montanas of the world have alum & booster networks to pull from that HCBUs might be able to dream of in another 6-8 generations.

This, exactly this. They're a historically under-served group of institutions that gave black students often their only opportunity at higher education. They're not brimming with billionaire alumni. There's no way a Jackson state, a Grambling, etc could ever commit the resources to football that we do, um does, ndsu does, never mind the big schools. Their challenges are more similar to northern Colorado, suu, Portland state; forgotten state-affilliated schools with way bigger brothers to compete with.

While Deion wants to produce NFL football players, that is not really the mission at HBCU’s. The football team does provide a way for some kids to go to college and have it paid for. That is a great thing! Making a big time football program in a tiny little city is not realistic. According to Wikipedia (I am too lazy to check if accurate) the endowment at Grambling is only $4.5 million. The endowment at Montana Tech is over $40 million.

Also a good point. I admire him for bringing that attitude there but it's going to take a ton of time and effort, use of his connections, to build in that direction. Your point was a solid one; football has been ancillary there to this point.

[onceacat]

What is not mentioned is what sort of priority is Jackson State putting on football.

Some of this uneven playing field is the effort each school puts into football program and much of that requires money.
So yes the large schools will have more resources to put into football, but don't sit back and wine about how unfair it is. Life is unfair.

Dieon needs to get the school, alum, and boosters to commit to improving the program. He needs them to buy into his vison to improve the team and its facilities. Not complain how unfair it is and that the large schools should be forced to share their resources with a smaller school. That is where the socialism argument comes into play.

and yes the NCAA does heavily favors the power 5 conferences. What did Dieon expect when he went to Jackson State?

What confuses me is that the HBCUs traditionally have large stadiums with large attendance numbers, but yet are unable to commit to improving the program with that resource. They should be rolling in monetary funds with the attendance numbers they brag about, but yet they seem to be broke.

Most HBCU’s do not have good financial status. Grambling only has enrollment of about 5,000. Their stadium only seats 18,000 and is way behind MSU. The stadium probably is comparable to Weber, except Weber is nicer with better supporting facilities. If you have ever been to the city of Grambling, you understand how tough it would be to recruit kids for anything. The city is only about 5,000 in population. It’s neighbor is Ruston (population of 20,000) where Louisiana Tech is located and they have a 40,000 seat stadium. The two cities combined are smaller than Butte. I have been to the city of Grambling and would compare it to the city of Manhattan or Whitehall.

Deion should have known what he was getting into.

How exactly do you propose that HCBUs fundraiser from boosters & alum? HCBUs are a relic of Jim Crow “Separate but impoverished”.

The Ohios and Alabamas...and he’ll, even the Montanas of the world have alum & booster networks to pull from that HCBUs might be able to dream of in another 6-8 generations.

This, exactly this. They're a historically under-served group of institutions that gave black students often their only opportunity at higher education. They're not brimming with billionaire alumni. There's no way a Jackson state, a Grambling, etc could ever commit the resources to football that we do, um does, ndsu does, never mind the big schools. Their challenges are more similar to northern Colorado, suu, Portland state; forgotten state-affilliated schools with way bigger brothers to compete with.

While Deion wants to produce NFL football players, that is not really the mission at HBCU’s. The football team does provide a way for some kids to go to college and have it paid for. That is a great thing! Making a big time football program in a tiny little city is not realistic. According to Wikipedia (I am too lazy to check if accurate) the endowment at Grambling is only $4.5 million. The endowment at Montana Tech is over $40 million.

Also a good point. I admire him for bringing that attitude there but it's going to take a ton of time and effort, use of his connections, to build in that direction. Your point was a solid one; football has been ancillary there to this point.

Unless you are a top tier power 5 coach, your emphasis should be similar to Choate's: We are educators first. This isn't a path to playing in the NFL, we are teaching you to be good citizens, employees, employers, teachers, fathers, etc.

Football isn't really about football.

[nodak651]

Pretty sure he was saying that their field literally was not flat.

[utucats]

I don't think it is socialist at all for a HC to point out that it is an uneven playing field. The reason why is that the product is much more marketable if there is competition. Look at major sports, the NFL is the king moneymaker and it is because they are a highly competitive league that is regulated via the salary cap to ensure that teams are playing on as even a playing field as possible.

I think the lack of a salary cap in baseball has contributed to the decline in baseball being America's game. The NFL has set a market based model that is the envy of all major sports and that should be a lesson about what sells. The free market demands that the most marketable system is the one that is adopted and based off of that logic I think Deion makes some valuable points.

[bobcat99]

I don't think it is socialist at all for a HC to point out that it is an uneven playing field. The reason why is that the product is much more marketable if there is competition. Look at major sports, the NFL is the king moneymaker and it is because they are a highly competitive league that is regulated via the salary cap to ensure that teams are playing on as even a playing field as possible.

I think the lack of a salary cap in baseball has contributed to the decline in baseball being America's game. The NFL has set a market based model that is the envy of all major sports and that should be a lesson about what sells. The free market demands that the most marketable system is the one that is adopted and based off of that logic I think Deion makes some valuable points.

Baseballs lack of popularity has more to do with them making the game as boring as possible, awful marketing, and penalizing players for having a personality, than it does the salary cap or lack thereof.