is at the least Semi-pro. It is all about money. Why else do you pay a Kent State a million to have a home game. ESPN and the rest of the networks have transformed the game into a money machine. Players leave to go Pro, and who can blame them. And how many come back for the degree. Very few. Those that make it and can manage the money don't need the degree.
College Football may use the name "College", but let's face it , it
- Thread starter walleye38
- Start date
The commercials seem to run longer than the game. I don’t know how many minutes each break is, but they sure compress a lot of ads into them.
It's not really football either. Football is really soccer
Disagree, Penn State football has a graduation rate of 87 percent.
Overall, Penn State’s athletes graduate at a rate of 90 percent.
Money is certainly important, as it is in most aspects of life these days but football funds most of the other sports other than men’s basketball and hockey.
Because of football and the revenues it generates it allows young people to compete in sports at a high level and get a valuable education. For many, it is their only chance of getting a college education.
People complain about the money in college sports, but that money does a lot of good.
Compare that to the money generated in the pro sports. Most of that money goes to the billionaire owners and millionaire athletes.
Money generated by college sports gives kids a chance of getting an education and play a sport.
So no, college sports are not semi pro sports.
College Football and Basketball is like ground beef and sausage, it is best enjoyed if you don't think about what goes in it.
And in 2018, Penn State (like any other big time School) wouldn’t be fielding a team if it wasn’t generating a ton of $$. Don’t mean to sound like a skeptic, but cfb is most definitely a minor league for the nfl.
Games used to be over in 3hours...which was perfect.
Nice piece of fiction there. Folks like Sandy Barbour are staking their livelihoods that you, and people like you, continue to believe that fairy tale.
There's now a time clock inside the stadium that counts down the time during commercials. For Kent State, the clock counted down form 2:30. For OSU, most times the clock counted down from 3:30.
It sucks that they have that many commercials, but I really like that they have that timer. I always hated watching that dude with the red jacket.
Those kids are getting a full ride, plus tutors, and any other help they need. They really aren't without help.Sounds like an NCAA commercial
Do you have any idea how many folks - who have ZERO to do with anything regarding the games, and ZERO to do with anything that benefits the (wink wink) student-athletes - are pulling down huge coin from the “amateur” athletics revenue?
Of the thousands of folks involved, the only “amateurs” are the handful of kids who take the field each week.
Sandy is really in your head, isn't she?
Not really. She's just so easy to tee off on.
Ironically a lot of pundits point to Jan 2, 1987 as the day that college football became all about the money
There's no perfect system. The college game is more exciting but it's incredibly imbalanced and a lot of shady crap goes down. When the elite programs get caught doing the shady crap nothing happens (OSU, USC, UNC) but when the non-traditional powers try and break through and rise up they get smacked down (SMU, Baylor, Ole Miss).
The NFL is perfectly balanced with the divisions and the playoff system (although I think they go overboard with the parity) but it's a boring product. All teams virtually run the same stuff and there are rarely big upsets (outside of what the Eagles did last year in the SB and Giants in '07) because the teams are all pretty close together.
I personally think the elite programs in the P5 need to split off and form their own division for football which would truly be like an NFL minor league (in the B1G that would include OSU, PSU, UM, NEB) and possibly have some sort of relegation system.
The NFL is perfectly balanced with the divisions and the playoff system (although I think they go overboard with the parity) but it's a boring product. All teams virtually run the same stuff and there are rarely big upsets (outside of what the Eagles did last year in the SB and Giants in '07) because the teams are all pretty close together.
I personally think the elite programs in the P5 need to split off and form their own division for football which would truly be like an NFL minor league (in the B1G that would include OSU, PSU, UM, NEB) and possibly have some sort of relegation system.
Sorry, I don't do ugly and Sandy doesn't do...well, let's leave it at that.
Pretty easy to blame "ESPN and the networks", but it also takes an audience with an insatiable appetite for football. Technology helps a lot too. Compare tv viewing pre-90s to today. Night and day.
Especially with Halloween just around the cornerSandy is really in your head, isn't she?
Do you expect people to work for free?Sounds like an NCAA commercial
Do you have any idea how many folks - who have ZERO to do with anything regarding the games, and ZERO to do with anything that benefits the (wink wink) student-athletes - are pulling down huge coin from the “amateur” athletics revenue?
Of the thousands of folks involved, the only “amateurs” are the handful of kids who take the field each week.
Do you think networks would broadcast games if they didn’t make money?
It’s nice to be able to watch road games and other college games on tv and I don’t have any problem with people making money to do it.
What do you expect, do you think this is the USSR and state run television should televise sports for free?
Again this isn’t true, Penn State still has a women’s field hockey team and yet they don’t make a dime off of it.
And most schools lose money on college football and yet they still field teams.
Another fact that shows that college football is not a semi pro league.
Please educate me on
Do you doubt that some of these athletes would not have had a chance to go to a university like Penn State if it weren’t for athletics?
What fairy tale? Football certainly does fund Penn State’s athletic department and it’s athletes graduate at a 90 percent rate. Do you have information to the contrary?
Do you doubt that some of these athletes would not have had a chance to go to a university like Penn State if it weren’t for athletics?
I get that that is where the money comes from, but it is almost to the point of unwatchable. If it had not been my favorite team playing Saturday night, I would absolutely have changed the channel.
Buying NCAA statistics hook, line, and sinker. Keep drinking the kool-aid, jack.
And your act is old. We know you believe that athletes are more deserving than anyone else of financial aid. Pointlessarguing with someone whose thinking is anchored in concrete.
If you have alternate statistics then please do show them.
And I certainly don’t believe athletes deserve financial aid more than everyone else.
But I do believe that those who strive for excellence and work hard whether it be in art, science, athletics, etc., are more deserving than those who don’t work hard.
And I certainly don’t have a problem with the athletic department using funds from sports teams to find other sports teams.
Apparently you believe there shouldn’t be college football so no other college sports teams get funding.
So much for game length. Longer the game more $$$.
I have friends who sell the advertising for NBC and Entercom who have told me that they want to increase length so those lofty salaries can be paid.
Look at the end of an NFL prime time game (even when the score is well decided) or the end of a close college game.
You can find "alternate statistics" at the same place you found the statistics you cited.
Did I write that there shouldn't be college football? College football is great and college football teams should make lots of money. What I do believe, though, is that non-revenue sports shouldn't be entitled to an automatic call on the surpluses generated by the football team.
I don’t know exactly what you are talking about because of your lack of specificity.
Do you mean that 14 percent of every dollar I spend on football tickets goes to athletes?
Or is it 14 percent of all college game tickets?
But keep in mind that my purchase of football tickets, Penn State is providing a service to me, the staging of a football game and that requires a stadium, maintenance, security, ushers, EMT’s etc, in addition to all the costs for the football team itself such as coaches, trainers, medical staff, dieticians, etc.
And my ticket is less expensive than going to an NFL game.
So not only are my tickets a better value than the pro game, a portion of it goes towards college athletics.
How would things be better if I spent my money on pro sports rather than college?
Is it better that a billionaire get those 14 percent profits rather than college athletes?
And what do you propose should happen, how do you propose to fund college athletics, how should Penn State pay for 31 varsity sports teams without football revenue?
We all know NCAA football is simply a cartel. The schools who break the so-called rules and get away with doing so -- like the entire SEC -- have not deluded their players into thinking that they came for an education. They are truly the minor leagues of the NFL, at no cost to the NFL.
Maybe for Penn State to get to "elite" status they need to forget about classroom attendance and focus entirely on playing football. Urban Meyer and Nick Saban are the role models for elite programs, and their players are football first, last, and always.
Maybe for Penn State to get to "elite" status they need to forget about classroom attendance and focus entirely on playing football. Urban Meyer and Nick Saban are the role models for elite programs, and their players are football first, last, and always.
So you too are buying NCAA statistics “hook line and sinker.”
And football supports things other than athletics, for example the Blue Band and the school of music.
And I’m sure there are other programs at the university that benefit from the football team and college athletics.
Personally I have no problem with money generated by athletics being used to fund athletics.
But if they want to use some of the money to benefit students In some other worthwhile way, I wouldn’t complain.
If college football is minor league for the NFL, what is high school football? Minor league for colleges? Pop Warner?
Yes, football does support the Blue Band. To what degree? $200k, maybe. Less than half a percent of the program's expense budget. As for other university programs receiving direct financial support from the athletic department, nope, not a dime. But it's all okay since you approve.
You totally missed the point. Please read it again. I didn't say anything about people working . You need to comprehend what you read.
