View Full Version : NCAA approves power five autonomy
DesignatedT
08-07-2014, 01:46 PM
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/24651709/ncaa-adopts-new-division-i-model-giving-power-5-autonomy
The 16-2 vote adopted the updated Division I model that was released to the membership last month. Board members changed little from that proposal, only reducing the number of conferences required to sponsor a proposal within the group of five conferences from three to one (what is currently required to sponsor Division I legislation). Any amendment is subject to approval by a five-conference presidential group before consideration by the full voting group. The steering committee, which will continue as a transition committee, indicated it was open to tweaks over the next year.
@AP_Top25: BREAKING: #NCAA board approves reforms that will give 5 biggest conferences ability to create own rules
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/board-adopts-new-division-i-structure
It lets the SEC, ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12 and Big 12 create their own rules — other conferences can adopt them, too, if they want — in certain areas to benefit college athletes. Leaders of the major conferences say they have the resources to provide more to athletes and have tried for years but get blocked by smaller schools. External pressure by lawsuits and Congress has also forced the issue.
Blake
08-07-2014, 01:54 PM
Lol NCAA in desperation mode to stay part of the Power 5.
Blake
08-07-2014, 01:54 PM
players about to be paid....
Blake
08-07-2014, 05:23 PM
Texas Tech football coach*Kliff Kingsbury*opposes having to only play teams from the "Power Five" conferences,*according to an article from ESPN.Three other Big 12 members -- Kansas State's*Bill Snyder, Texas'*Charlie Strong*and TCU's*Gary Patterson*-- shared Kingsbury's opinion in ESPN's poll. The Power Five includes the ACC, Big Ten, Pac 12, Southeastern Conference and Notre Dame.Big 12 coaches voted 6-4 in favor of playing just Power Five teams, according to the article, which added a stipulation in this hypothetical situation that teams wouldn't have to win six games to be eligible for bowl games because of the more challenging schedule.
http://texastech.247sports.com/Article/In-ESPN-poll-Kingsbury-opposed-having-to-play-Power-Five-teams-30132984
It would suck hard for utsa if some or all of the power 5 conferences decide to play just each other.
leemajors
08-07-2014, 05:42 PM
It would suck hard for utsa if some or all of the power 5 conferences decide to play just each other.
Be taking lots of $$ outta those schools pockets, too.
Clipper Nation
08-07-2014, 05:59 PM
This won't really impact the AAC or MWC, who will most likely adopt the autonomy plan, but the lolutsa's of the college football world are f:lolcked....
No way would the middle or bottom schools from each conference vote for that. Schools like Tech that start off 5-0 and then fade would have trouble reaching bowl eligibility if they played just P5 schools.
Clipper Nation
08-07-2014, 06:07 PM
It would suck hard for utsa if some or all of the power 5 conferences decide to play just each other.
I don't think AD's will go for that, they don't want to give up the cupcake games that inflate their programs' records....
This won't really impact the AAC or MWC, who will most likely adopt the autonomy plan, but the lolutsa's of the college football world are f:lolcked....
UTSA has a better chance of getting a call-up to the big leagues than Boise State tbh.
Also the MWC is not better off financially than CUSA. The AAC probably is though.
Blake
08-07-2014, 07:03 PM
No way would the middle or bottom schools from each conference vote for that. Schools like Tech that start off 5-0 and then fade would have trouble reaching bowl eligibility if they played just P5 schools.
it might also jeopardize a heavy weight's chance at an undefeated season.
MannyIsGod
08-07-2014, 10:48 PM
Well, college sports was fun while it lasted. Best case scenario for me would be if the P5 just play each other. I would hate to see UNM try to keep up with this shit.
Blake
08-07-2014, 10:51 PM
TCU will forever be grateful to A&M for leaving.
Clipper Nation
08-07-2014, 10:56 PM
UTSA has a better chance of getting a call-up to the big leagues than Boise State tbh.
:lmao
lolutsa
MannyIsGod
08-07-2014, 10:58 PM
:lmao
lolutsa
He's right. This type of move was meant to prevent schools like yours from making noise. What exactly do you have to offer the P5? UTSA at least has a TV market.
Clipper Nation
08-07-2014, 11:26 PM
He's right. This type of move was meant to prevent schools like yours from making noise. What exactly do you have to offer the P5? UTSA at least has a TV market.
Unless the Big 12 somehow wants to add yet another Texas school (and lolutsa would probably still be behind Houston, Rice, and even SMU in that case) or the SEC is just dying to split up their TV money even more unnecessarily (and again, lolutsa would not be high on the list), I fail to see all these great opportunities for lolutsa to move up, tbh....
Unless the Big 12 somehow wants to add yet another Texas school (and lolutsa would probably still be behind Houston, Rice, and even SMU in that case) or the SEC is just dying to split up their TV money even more unnecessarily (and again, lolutsa would not be high on the list), I fail to see all these great opportunities for lolutsa to move up, tbh....
Nobody is saying a move up is right around the corner, dumbfuck. The program needs to continue growing to be considered, obviously. If it takes off though they'll be a strong candidate with the San Antonio market behind them.
Look at UCF, they had a nice run and are now a top choice to get called up. Boise State has had an even longer run yet aren't taken seriously for a move up...why do you think that's the case, dummy ?
BTW Rice and SMU are small, private universities with terrible fan support. Only way SMU has a brighter future is if paying players becomes the norm and their donors really step up like they did in their Pony Express days. Rice is content with just being an academic powerhouse.
MannyIsGod
08-07-2014, 11:56 PM
Unless the Big 12 somehow wants to add yet another Texas school (and lolutsa would probably still be behind Houston, Rice, and even SMU in that case) or the SEC is just dying to split up their TV money even more unnecessarily (and again, lolutsa would not be high on the list), I fail to see all these great opportunities for lolutsa to move up, tbh....
The point isn't that UTSA is going to be called up anytime soon, its that BSt is fucked about as much as anyone in this deal. But sure, lol at others all you want.
Pelicans78
08-08-2014, 12:10 AM
UTSA have a good chance of being the next team to go to the AAC.
Blake
08-08-2014, 07:27 AM
Nobody is saying a move up is right around the corner, dumbfuck. The program needs to continue growing to be considered, obviously. If it takes off though they'll be a strong candidate with the San Antonio market behind them.
Look at UCF, they had a nice run and are now a top choice to get called up. Boise State has had an even longer run yet aren't taken seriously for a move up...why do you think that's the case, dummy ?
UCF also has a shit load of students. I haven't looked but I'm thinking 55k.
Blake
08-08-2014, 08:18 AM
Neither Boise nor utsa has any shot of joining the big 12, SEC, or big 10.
can't see utsa getting invited to ACC.
Boise would be a natural geographical fit for Pac 12 expansion, plus their brand name gives them the edge over utsa.
And if the Pac were to expand, into Texas, seems to me they'd take SMU over utsa.
Vito Corleone
08-08-2014, 09:00 AM
Unless a provision is made for BYU and Notre Dame they will likely have to either join a P5 conference or get shut out.
Blake
08-08-2014, 09:07 AM
Unless a provision is made for BYU and Notre Dame they will likely have to either join a P5 conference or get shut out.
I don't see it logistically happening, but how bad ass would Notre Dame to the big 12 be.
How much more awesome would it be to add both Notre Dame and lolutsa.
I'd be rofling for weeks.
DesignatedT
08-08-2014, 09:21 AM
UTSA has the all the tools to become a player. They just want all this to slow down a little bit because they aren't there yet and they don't want to get left out beforehand.
If there was any doubt about the big12 dissolving in the future, that's pretty much gone. The big12 will likely be forced to play CG like the rest of the conferences though and Notre Dame is going to have to join a conference full time soon.
Blake
08-08-2014, 09:40 AM
Why would the big 12 will be forced to play a championship game?
The only reason to add a CG is money.
DesignatedT
08-08-2014, 10:51 AM
There will be a whole new board led by the powers of each of the five conferences voting on matters and governing each other. If all four others are doing it, the fifth one will too.
Especially if they only start playing teams within the "power five".
DesignatedT
08-08-2014, 10:55 AM
Although there is still a possibility that the "power five" could still morph into the 4 super conferences that have been heavily discussed before but I doubt it. It just makes sense to have four 16 team super conferences with the winner of each conference representing them in a 4 team playoff. But as of right now this seems to solidify the five conferences for now.
Vito Corleone
08-08-2014, 11:12 AM
A few points I want to hit upon.
1. The NCAA is fighting for their lives right now, this vote is an appeasement to the schools in the P5 conference to not leave. if they leave they get to keep all the money and make all the rules.
2. Since this has become an issue the NCAA has not placed a single school from a P5 conference on probation. Not surprising since they are trying to not provoke the dog to bite them. Anyone actually think none of those schools have not done anything wrong?
3. For the rich schools like Texas, this has the making of releasng the Kracken, basically there will be nothing to hold back a school like Texas from giving every kid anything they want.
4. Remember when the NCAA put the handcuffs on the LHN, you can bet that those will be coming off pretty quickly.
5. If the Big 12 does chose to get a championship game, you can bet it will be done without having to add new members.
6. You can also bet that no new members will be added to any P5 conference unless it means added money to their TV contract. The one exception to this will be Notre Dame, if they are forced to join, you can bet every conference will be lining up to get them.
7. I can see the LHN morphing into a Big 12 network if and only if Texas gets a better cut from the deal, and I actually think it's going to happen.
8. P5 rule changes I can see happening. Increase in scholarship limits, slush funds, Making legit the hundred dollar handshakes, killing all those stupid rules about where the coaches can take a recruit to dinner. high school games on conference/team sports channels. Recruiting is going to become a huge part of the programming on the conference channels.
9. The playoffs is about to expand to about 8 teams very soon.
10 College football will never be the same.
Blake
08-08-2014, 11:15 AM
There will be a whole new board led by the powers of each of the five conferences voting on matters and governing each other. If all four others are doing it, the fifth one will too.
Especially if they only start playing teams within the "power five".
that's not a logical conclusion at all, especially if the big 12 stay at 10 teams.
Blake
08-08-2014, 11:18 AM
7. I can see the LHN morphing into a Big 12 network if and only if Texas gets a better cut from the deal, and I actually think it's going to happen.
What makes you think the other schools would give up their current tier 3 deals?
DesignatedT
08-08-2014, 11:21 AM
3. For the rich schools like Texas, this has the making of releasng the Kracken, basically there will be nothing to hold back a school like Texas from giving every kid anything they want.
Maybe, just depends on what kind of rule changes the P5 conferences are willing to pass and how hard they will be governing these rules.
5. If the Big 12 does chose to get a championship game, you can bet it will be done without having to add new members.
If any issue like this comes to a vote of the "power 5" commissioners, the vote would easily be passed in a 4-1 motion. If a new board is made up of representatives of the power five conferences, this doesn't solely become the big12's decision anymore. These issues will be discussed amongst all the conferences. And as it currently stands, I'd bet that the other four conferences feel the big12 has it a little easier at the moment.
6. You can also bet that no new members will be added to any P5 conference unless it means added money to their TV contract. The one exception to this will be Notre Dame, if they are forced to join, you can bet every conference will be lining up to get them.
You're right that it is all about the money as well know. I could see the big12 adding more members if they feel it's necessary but the days of poaching members from one of the power five conferences are gone. Everyone has a seat at the table if they are in one of the five conferences so any new potential members will have to come from outside it.
8. P5 rule changes I can see happening. Increase in scholarship limits, slush funds, Making legit the hundred dollar handshakes, killing all those stupid rules about where the coaches can take a recruit to dinner. high school games on conference/team sports channels. Recruiting is going to become a huge part of the programming on the conference channels.
Easily the most interesting and controversial part of all this. Unsure how this will play out and how the governing board of the "Power Five" will feel about these issues.
10 College football will never be the same.
Pretty much. Once it all gets settled it could be a pretty good setup though. The NCAA is a fuckin mess and I have faith the conferences can essentially run themselves better. Only thing is the day of actually caring about academics is gone. All about athletics.
Will be also interesting to see how basketball and baseball adapt to this.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 02:50 PM
Poor AAC and MWC schools.
So close, yet so far.
lolUTSA may as well just concentrate on academics now so Rice isn't embarrassed around us.
Neither Boise nor utsa has any shot of joining the big 12, SEC, or big 10.
can't see utsa getting invited to ACC.
Boise would be a natural geographical fit for Pac 12 expansion, plus their brand name gives them the edge over utsa.
And if the Pac were to expand, into Texas, seems to me they'd take SMU over utsa.
Currently, no. I think when anyone brings up UTSA we are talking 15-20+ years from now--facilities need to be built and the academics need to continue improving. But the landscape could be completely different by then so the odds are still stacked against us.
Boise State otoh has had about as much success as you can ask for at the G5 level. If anybody wanted them they would've snatched them up by now. Their academic standards are far from being a good fit for the PAC12. I think they may have plateaued.
Look up pictures of SMU attendance over the past couple of years. I can't see a school with such shitty fan support getting called up. I think UTSA will be right behind UH for the best G5 program in Texas in the near future tbh.
UCF also has a shit load of students. I haven't looked but I'm thinking 55k.
Yeah, I think they're like the 2nd-3rd largest in the country. UTSA isn't exactly a small school though. Don't think enrollment would hinder us tbh.
Blake
08-08-2014, 03:17 PM
Currently, no. I think when anyone brings up UTSA we are talking 15-20+ years from now--facilities need to be built and the academics need to continue improving. But the landscape could be completely different by then so the odds are still stacked against us.
Boise State otoh has had about as much success as you can ask for at the G5 level. If anybody wanted them they would've snatched them up by now. Their academic standards are far from being a good fit for the PAC12. I think they may have plateaued.
Look up pictures of SMU attendance over the past couple of years. I can't see a school with such shitty fan support getting called up. I think UTSA will be right behind UH for the best G5 program in Texas in the near future tbh.
If Houston were where El Paso or even Lubbock is, I think the Pac 12 would look hard at them.
I think attendance is a very small factor in conference expansion. Right now it's all about the TV deals and the Pac would make some nice bank hitting up that DFW market.
Poor AAC and MWC schools.
So close, yet so far.
lolUTSA may as well just concentrate on academics now so Rice isn't embarrassed around us.
lol self hate
If Houston were where El Paso or even Lubbock is, I think the Pac 12 would look hard at them.
I think attendance is a very small factor in conference expansion. Right now it's all about the TV deals and the Pac would make some nice bank hitting up that DFW market.
Market >> attendance, for sure.
But I think there's gotta be a line drawn for acceptable attendance. SMU struggled to hit 10k most of the season.
Blake
08-08-2014, 03:38 PM
Market >> attendance, for sure.
But I think there's gotta be a line drawn for acceptable attendance. SMU struggled to hit 10k most of the season.
I wonder what kind of deal they could make with Jerry to have all their home games at att stadium.
that would guarantee 4-5 Pac 12 games there every year.
Seems to me that would turn the commissioner's head their way.
Their on-campus stadium is like 10 years old tbh.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 04:06 PM
lol self hateMore like realism. The pursuit of a P5 slot was always dubious at best.
Getting shut out of that for good might be the best thing that could happen.
More like realism. The pursuit of a P5 slot was always dubious at best.
Getting shut out of that for good might be the best thing that could happen.
The AAC is a realistic, short-intermediate term possibility. You get there and there's still good money to be made, on top of being the triple A conference for the P5.
Good thing UTSA and the city aren't self-hating homos like you.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 04:29 PM
The AAC is a realistic, short-intermediate term possibility. You get there and there's still good money to be made, on top of being the triple A conference for the P5.
Good thing UTSA and the city aren't self-hating homos like you.I don't think those at UTSA ever planned to be in a P5 conference.
If they can achieve a $50 million budget without an obscene subsidy, I'm all for it.
As it is, the budget is $25 million with an obscene subsidy.
I really don't understand why people like you an BuddyHolly have to freak out whenever someone isn't in full chamber of commerce booster mode.
Tell me how to get UTSA to even an Iowa State level of funding and I'll be on board. It might be more difficult than you think.
Yeah, Hickey hasn't done anything to suggest she is content with being small time. She's actually been the complete opposite with some of her ballsy decisions.
:lol The program is entering its fourth year and you wanna talk about realism? Allow it some time to grow before you look down on the budget or go all negative nancy on its aspirations. If decades from now we are in the same place we are now then self hate all you want.
Blake
08-08-2014, 04:51 PM
Their on-campus stadium is like 10 years old tbh.
Well if they're happy with their 32k stadium, then they're going to have to be content to be left out of the P5.
It's funny, I would have thought I would be seeing schools going full desperation mode right about now, scrambling to see what it would take for a conference to add them.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 04:54 PM
Yeah, Hickey hasn't done anything to suggest she is content with being small time. She's actually been the complete opposite with some of her ballsy decisions.
:lol The program is entering its fourth year and you wanna talk about realism? Allow it some time to grow before you look down on the budget or go all negative nancy on its aspirations.What are its aspirations?
I had never heard anything explicitly stated beyond C-USA.
Show me the program's stated aspirations. Show me how it will grow to an Iowa State level of funding without a huge subsidy from the school and its students.
This chart is a little simplistic, but it's easy to determine a ballpark figure for a public school's athletic program if it wants to be in a P5 program:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/
All but about three of the P5 schools have both:
1) A budget above $50 million.
2) Subsidies less than 20% of that amount.
If UTSA has a master plan to break into the P5, I'd love to see it. None of the previous goals or plans were secret, so saying further plans are secret would be disingenuous at this point.
Blake
08-08-2014, 04:55 PM
The AAC is a realistic, short-intermediate term possibility. You get there and there's still good money to be made, on top of being the triple A conference for the P5.
Good thing UTSA and the city aren't self-hating homos like you.
False hope is a waste of time and emotion, imo.
now as for the Oakland Raiders moving to SA? fuck ya, I'm all in! Where can I donate money for it?
Blake
08-08-2014, 04:58 PM
Louisville got added to the ACC, IIRC
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 05:00 PM
Louisville got added to the ACC, IIRCYeah, I remembered and edited. Their numbers made that a no brainer.
Louisville got added to the ACC, IIRC
AAC
Where UH, SMU, UCF, USF, UConn, etc are at.
edit: nvm
What are its aspirations?
I had never heard anything explicitly stated beyond C-USA.
Show me the program's stated aspirations. Show me how it will grow to an Iowa State level of funding without a huge subsidy from the school and its students.
This chart is a little simplistic, but it's easy to determine a ballpark figure for a public school's athletic program if it wants to be in a P5 program:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/
All but about three of the P5 schools have both:
1) A budget above $50 million.
2) Subsidies less than 20% of that amount.
If UTSA has a master plan to break into the P5, I'd love to see it. None of the previous goals or plans were secret, so saying further plans are secret would be disingenuous at this point.
The preferred destination was CUSA back when the plan was to start off in the Southland, and before the conference got gutted by realignment.
Those initial plans changed when opportunities presented themselves and they can change again if the program takes off.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 05:05 PM
AAC
Where UH, SMU, UCF, USF, UConn, etc are at.
edit: nvmConfusing, I know -- but their budget ($90+ million, ~12% subsidy) is solidly P5 level. They earned their place in the ACC.
Confusing, I know -- but their budget ($90+ million, ~12% subsidy) is solidly P5 level. They earned their place in the ACC.
Did you know the program is 4 years old? Noone is claiming UTSA is ready to make a jump at this exact moment.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 05:08 PM
The preferred destination was CUSA back when the plan was to start off in the Southland, and before the conference got gutted by realignment.
Those plans changed when opportunities presented themselves and they can change again if the program takes off.Since no opportunity has presented itself, what have the plans changed to?
C-USA was the explicitly stated goal.
Is there a different explicitly stated goal now?
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 05:09 PM
Did you know the program is 4 years old? Noone is claiming UTSA is ready to make a jump at this exact moment.I told you the ballpark figure it will take to make the jump.
What is the plan to make that jump?
Is there a plan to make that jump?
Is there even a desire to make that jump among those who would make such a plan?
leemajors
08-08-2014, 05:59 PM
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11328442/judge-rules-ncaa-ed-obannon-antitrust-case
In a landmark decision, a federal judge ruled Friday that the NCAA is in violation of the nation's antitrust laws by restricting the compensation that major college football and men's basketball athletes can receive for use of their names, images and likeness.
U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken, in a 99-page decision that followed a contentious three-week trial in June, wrote, "The Court finds that the challenged NCAA rules unreasonably restrain trade in the market for certain educational and athletic opportunities offered by NCAA Division I schools."
:lol
If your product blows up you adjust to accommodate. The plan was already drastically changed once, not sure why you act like changing it again would be an issue.
I don't have any 'proof' bc I don't know how the program will progress. Your argument isn't any different than mine bc you don't know either.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 06:20 PM
:lol
If your product blows up you adjust to accommodate. The plan was already drastically changed once, not sure why you act like changing it again would be an issue.The stated goal never changed. It was always C-USA. Maybe it could be the AAC some time in the future, but UTSA fits in the C-USA geographically and fiscally at this time.
I don't have any 'proof' bc I don't know how the program will progress. Your argument isn't any different than mine bc you don't know either.i have already stated what it will take to realistically move to P5.
I follow the business side of lolUTSA fairly closely and I have seen nothing suggesting a new goal of any kind conference-wise, much less P5.
Any change now will be slow in coming. UTSA has to increase its budget and lower the percentage of that budget subsidized by the school if it wants to move to the next AAC/MWC level. I consider even that to be a long shot. There is no incentive for the P5 to let any other schools in save BYU and Notre Dame -- and I don't know think any current AAC/MWC teams can realistically make a move into the P5 from a money standpoint. On the contrary, having this kind of division might be a relief to many of the programs who will feel less pressure to subsidize their programs so heavily to keep up.
If you have any quote from anyone connected with the program saying a P5 berth was the goal of the program, feel free to post a link to it. I never read any such quote and do not believe that was ever the goal.
The stated goal never changed. It was always C-USA. Maybe it could be the AAC some time in the future, but UTSA fits in the C-USA geographically and fiscally at this time.
And if 5 years ago I would've told you that in 2014 we'd be a full fledged FBS program and a member of CUSA, you'd be posting the same crap.
Goals can change to accommodate growth. That's not some kind of novelty.
i have already stated what it will take to realistically move to P5.
I follow the business side of lolUTSA fairly closely and I have seen nothing suggesting a new goal of any kind conference-wise, much less P5.
Any change now will be slow in coming. UTSA has to increase its budget and lower the percentage of that budget subsidized by the school if it wants to move to the next AAC/MWC level. I consider even that to be a long shot. There is no incentive for the P5 to let any other schools in save BYU and Notre Dame -- and I don't know think any current AAC/MWC teams can realistically make a move into the P5 from a money standpoint. On the contrary, having this kind of division might be a relief to many of the programs who will feel less pressure to subsidize their programs so heavily to keep up.
If you have any quote from anyone connected with the program saying a P5 berth was the goal of the program, feel free to post a link to it. I never read any such quote and do not believe that was ever the goal.
Of course there isn't statements detailing a plan to move up. How many programs have one of those, especially 4 year old ones?
Your argument is based on an assumption that all things will remain the same at UTSA. Considering the strides we've made on and off the field just in the past decade I'm not sure why you think that makes any sense.
Obviously its up for debate whether it will grow enough to be considered for a P5 slot. I wouldn't bet on it. But I do think it's pretty safe to say that some growth will be achieved.
Also not sure why you are pimping the MWC. Their TV deal and markets aren't any better than CUSA's.
You need to cut down on the self hate.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 06:42 PM
And if 5 years ago I would've told you that in 2014 we'd be a full fledged FBS program and a member of CUSA, you'd be posting the same crap.
Goals can change to accommodate growth. That's not some kind of novelty.But the goal from the start was C-USA. It was always a realistic goal. Only the timeline changed.
Of course there isn't statements detailing a plan to move up. How many programs have one of those, especially 4 year old ones? There was a stated plan to move to FBS and C-USA.
Your argument is based on an assumption that all things will remain the same at UTSA. Considering the strides we've made on and off the field just in the past decade I'm not sure why you think that makes any sense.Numbers are numbers. No one has ever shown any realistic plan to move up to p5 even in theory. I have provided links to the type of funding P5 schools have. It's up to the boosters to show how achieving those numbers is possible.
Obviously its up for debate whether it will grow enough to be considered for a P5 slot. I wouldn't bet on it. But I do think it's pretty safe to say that some growth will be achieved.So since you actually agree with me, why the rancor?
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 06:46 PM
Also not sure why you are pimping the MWC. Their TV deal and markets aren't any better than CUSA's. I'm not pimping anything. The programs in the MWC and AAC are an a level above that of UTSA. If UTSA is to move up, they have to achieve that level of funding to begin with.
You need to cut down on the self hate.You need to cut down on the ad hominems. Especially the ones that are nonsensical. It does nothing for your argument and comes across as immature. It's a big reason others make fun of UTSA fans here and never take them seriously.
smh there was a stated plan for the move to FBS bc the program was just starting up. Its the standard to state what classification you intend to be. It's a whole other thing to be in a G5 conference and explicitly state when you plan to move up to P5--way too many unknowns for that to be possible.
I don't agree with you.
I'm not pimping anything. The programs in the MWC and AAC are an a level above that of UTSA. If UTSA is to move up, they have to achieve that level of funding to begin with.
You need to cut down on the ad hominems. Especially the ones that are nonsensical. It does nothing for your argument and comes across as immature. It's a big reason others make fun of UTSA fans here and never take them seriously.
What schools? Show me the numbers and how they compare to CUSA's. For the MWC, I agree about the AAC.
Calling your own school lolutsa isn't immature? :lol
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 07:00 PM
smh there was a stated plan for the move to FBS bc the program was just starting up. Its the standard to state what classification you intend to be. It's a whole other thing to be in a G5 conference and explicitly state when you plan to move up to P5--way too many unknowns for that to be possible.
I don't agree with you.The criteria for P5 are stunningly obvious. The numbers have been linked and interpreted for you.
The plan would be to achieve the level and proportion of funding in line with most P5 schools.
That's why I named specific bottom feeder P5 public schools and asked what is UTSA's plan to have the kind of funding they have.
That's what they need to get into the P5. That is what they need to plan if they want to join the P5.
I personally don't think there are any plans to even try to get into the P5. My evidence is the lack of any plan to get into the P5 or even state such an entry as a long term goal.
If you have any evidence P5 is the long term goal of anyone in power at UTSA, post it.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 07:04 PM
What schools? Show me the numbers and how they compare to CUSA's. For the MWC, I agree about the AAC.So you didn't look at the link I provided and explicitly told you can do exactly what you are demanding of me. Go look back at my posts and get the link yourself.
Calling your own school lolutsa isn't immature? :lolIt's satire. Does it upset you?
The criteria for P5 are stunningly obvious. The numbers have been linked and interpreted for you.
The plan would be to achieve the level and proportion of funding in line with most P5 schools.
That's why I named specific bottom feeder P5 public schools and asked what is UTSA's plan to have the kind of funding they have.
That's what they need to get into the P5. That is what they need to plan if they want to join the P5.
I personally don't think there are any plans to even try to get into the P5. My evidence is the lack of any plan to get into the P5 or even state such an entry as a long term goal.
If you have any evidence P5 is the long term goal of anyone in power at UTSA, post it.
What do these stunningly obvious numbers prove other than the fact that UTSA is currently not on par with P5 schools? Something which nobody is disputing btw.
Has the program peaked? Will those numbers stay the same? If the answer is no then UTSA's 2013 numbers won't mean shit decades from now.
So you didn't look at the link I provided and explicitly told you can do exactly what you are demanding of me. Go look back at my posts and get the link yourself.
Hmm, looks like they do have an edge. Can you do the average revenue, expenses and percent subsidized for the three conferences? I'd do it myself but not at home right now.
It's satire. Does it upset you?
Satire of what? What the program has done in four years is unprecedented for a start-up, far from satire material.
ChumpDumper
08-08-2014, 09:55 PM
What do these stunningly obvious numbers prove other than the fact that UTSA is currently not on par with P5 schools? Something which nobody is disputing btw.Proves just how far they have to go and how difficult it will be. Do you understand?
Has the program peaked? Will those numbers stay the same? If the answer is no then UTSA's 2013 numbers won't mean shit decades from now.What are you saying is UTSA's potential? Say it right now.
I am saying it will not be P5.
Hmm, looks like they do have an edge. Can you do the average revenue, expenses and percent subsidized for the three conferences? I'd do it myself but not at home right now.You can do it anywhere and anytime. The numbers aren't going anywhere.
Satire of what? What the program has done in four years is unprecedented for a start-up, far from satire material.It was a satire of people who derided UTSA.
Now it is a satire of irrational, immature UTSA fans.
Proves just how far they have to go and how difficult it will be. Do you understand?
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Confused-Jacksonville-Jaguars-fan-in-stands.gif
Link to anything I said that came close to suggesting they are close or will easily get there?
What are you saying is UTSA's potential? Say it right now.
I am saying it will not be P5.
I think it's bright. How bright I'm not sure. I already said if I had to bet I wouldn't bet on getting to P5. Now the AAC I'd bet we do.
Its all speculation though. Not sure why you think your opinion holds more weight bc your throwing out numbers that won't mean anything in a decade or two.
You can do it anywhere and anytime. The numbers aren't going anywhere.
smh
AAC: 47,959,488...47,905,613...43.5%
MWC: 36,802,078...37,332,236...48.2%
CUSA: 26,959,662...26,596,806...61.7%
Expenses>Revenue for the MWC apparently. Although that would probably be the case for CUSA too with a lower subsidy. I'm wondering if basketball is the difference, since they're a much better basketball conference. Im just not seeing that big of a separation in football--could be wrong though.
UTSA got an invite to the MWC and chose CUSA back in the day btw. I don't see them as a clear step up like I do the AAC tbh.
It was a satire of people who derided UTSA.
Now it is a satire of irrational, immature UTSA fans.
And how exactly does that extend to the football program?
ChumpDumper
08-09-2014, 07:59 AM
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Confused-Jacksonville-Jaguars-fan-in-stands.gif
Link to anything I said that came close to suggesting they are close or will easily get there?You cite it as more of a possibility than anyone here an have gotten upset when shown evidence to the contrary.
I think it's bright. How bright I'm not sure. I already said if I had to bet I wouldn't bet on getting to P5. Now the AAC I'd bet we do.
Its all speculation though. Not sure why you think your opinion holds more weight bc your throwing out numbers that won't mean anything in a decade or two.Your speculation is based on nothing. At least I looked up something. You didn't even click the link I provided.
smh
AAC: 47,959,488...47,905,613...43.5%
MWC: 36,802,078...37,332,236...48.2%
CUSA: 26,959,662...26,596,806...61.7%
Expenses>Revenue for the MWC apparently. Although that would probably be the case for CUSA too with a lower subsidy. I'm wondering if basketball is the difference, since they're a much better basketball conference. Im just not seeing that big of a separation in football--could be wrong though.
UTSA got an invite to the MWC and chose CUSA back in the day btw. I don't see them as a clear step up like I do the AAC tbh.It's a clear step up in the funding, as you clearly demonstrated. Which is what we have been talking about all along. There are plenty of reasons to choose C-USA over MWC for a program like UTSA. Better parity in (lower) funding could have easily been one.
And how exactly does that extend to the football program?Irrational immature lolUTSA fans talk about lolUTSA football here.
Does the term upset you?
You cite it as more of a possibility than anyone here an have gotten upset when shown evidence to the contrary.
:lol Link to where I got upset? Also giving UTSA a slight chance at reaching P5 as opposed to none, does not mean I think they are close or that it would be an easy road. Stop making stuff up it makes you look like an irrational, immature lolutsa fan.
Your initial comment was that UTSA might as well shutdown the program btw--selling your team short per usual. Do you realize how many G5 teams would love to have the things UTSA has going for them? That's were you went full retard, you thinking we won't reach P5 I have no issues with.
Your speculation is based on nothing. At least I looked up something. You didn't even click the link I provided.
And guess what those numbers will mean as the program continues to grow? Nothing.
There's plenty of reasons to think UTSA has a bright future, actually. Most people and media see that but of course you don't since you have that self-hate thing going on.
It's a clear step up in the funding, as you clearly demonstrated. Which is what we have been talking about all along. There are plenty of reasons to choose C-USA over MWC for a program like UTSA. Better parity in (lower) funding could have easily been one.
Geography was by far the biggest reason Hickey chose CUSA. Your reason is just dumb. You are actually implying UTSA has such a small-time mindset that it chose CUSA over the richer MWC bc the current budget doesn't stack up to theirs. How many schools would even do that? lol self hate
Irrational immature lolUTSA fans talk about lolUTSA football here.
Does the term upset you?
Bro you use the term whether there are UTSA fans around or not. There's 2-3 around the boards aside from me and you. Talking about the SEC Network: 'Oh I'm just glad lolutsa ALMOST has all their games televised.'
No. It does sound pretty pathetic coming from an alumnus though.
ChumpDumper
08-09-2014, 02:14 PM
:lol Link to where I got upset?the name calling gave you away.
Also giving UTSA a slight chance at reaching P5 as opposed to none, does not mean I think they are close or that it would be an easy road. Stop making stuff up it makes you look like an irrational, immature lolutsa fan.So tell us how you think they can get to P5. don't be immature and irrational about it.
Your initial comment was that UTSA might as well shutdown the program btw--selling your team short per usual. Do you realize how many G5 teams would love to have the things UTSA has going for them? That's were you went full retard.That is an outright lie. Why are you lying? That's being irrational and immature.
Here is my first post in full:
Poor AAC and MWC schools.
So close, yet so far.
lolUTSA may as well just concentrate on academics now so Rice isn't embarrassed around us.
Nothing at all about shutting down the program.
You need to apologize for lying and being so immature and irrational.
And guess what those numbers will mean as the program continues to grow? Nothing.Actually money means everything here. That's why there is a P5 in the first place.
There's plenty of reasons to think UTSA has a bright future, actually. Most people and media see that but if course you don't since you have that self-hate thing going on.I never said the future isn't bright. You're lying again. it's amazing how much you have to resort to such irrational and immature tactics because you are angry that you think I am threatening your dream by posting on a message board.
Geography was by far the biggest reason Hickey chose CUSA. Your reason is just dumb. You are actually implying UTSA has such a small-time mindset that it chose CUSA over the richer MWC. How many schools would even do that? lol self hateSchools that felt they didn't have the funding to compete and travel in a far flung conference could easily make such a decision.
Anyone thinking rationally can see that a division including three in-state rivals and others in Louisiana and Mississippi is much easier on a relatively small budget compared to a division where the school in Albuquerque is the closest rival.
Geography + lower costs + budget parity = easy C-USA choice.
Bro you use the term whether there are UTSA fans around or not. There's 2-3 around the boards aside from me and you. Talking about the SEC Network: 'Oh I'm just glad lolutsa ALMOST has all their games televised.'
No. It does sound pretty pathetic coming from an alumnus though.It's upsetting you, so I will continue to use it.
lolUTSA.
the name calling gave you away.
So tell us how you think they can get to P5. don't be immature and irrational about it.
What name calling?
It's dependent on how the program progresses, I've said this already. Tell me how giving us a slight chance implies I see an easy road or think we are close to getting there?
That is an outright lie. Why are you lying? That's being irrational and immature.
Here is my first post in full:
Nothing at all about shutting down the program.
You need to apologize for lying and being so immature and irrational.
Ok, so what exactly were you trying to say the next step for the program should be?
Actually money means everything here. That's why there is a P5 in the first place.
Money from the current year means everything. 20 years from now money from 2013 won't be current, now will it?
I never said the future isn't bright. You're lying again. it's amazing how much you have to resort to such irrational and immature tactics because you are angry that you think I am threatening your dream by posting on a message board.
lol dream
What do you see in store for UTSA in the future, Chumpie? Aside from no P5 of course.
Schools that felt they didn't have the funding to compete and travel in a far flung conference could easily make such a decision.
Anyone thinking rationally can see that a division including three in-state rivals and others in Louisiana and Mississippi is much easier on a relatively small budget compared to a division where the school in Albuquerque is the closest rival.
Geography + lower costs + budget parity = easy C-USA choice.
Funding is likely to increase if you enter a bigger league. ECU's budget wasn't on par with AAC's. Didn't stop them from jumping. It's a stupid notion on your part.
It's upsetting you, so I will continue to use it.
lolUTSA.
It's very upsetting.
lol immature
ChumpDumper
08-09-2014, 03:10 PM
What name calling?
The AAC is a realistic, short-intermediate term possibility. You get there and there's still good money to be made, on top of being the triple A conference for the P5.
Good thing UTSA and the city aren't self-hating homos like you.Hey, you lied again. Irrational and immature.
It's dependent on how the program progresses, I've said this already. Tell me how giving us a slight chance implies I see an easy road or think we are close to getting there?You get bent out of shape and start name calling in the face of any argument contrary to your dream.
Ok, so what exactly were you trying to say the next step for the program should be?Not shutting down the program. You flat out lied about that.
Money from the current year means everything. 20 years from now money from 2013 won't be current, now will it?Money will still mean everything then. If you want to make the argument it won't, make it here.
lol dreamP5 isn't your dream for lolUTSA? Just say it isn't. I will accept it is not your dream if you explicitly say so.
What do you see in store for UTSA in the future, Chumpie? Aside from no P5 of course.If the P5 becomes a reality, it's going to be tough for anyone to break in after the initial 67 or so close the door after them. It could actually turn out to be a blessing in disguise for lolUTSA and the others left out. I guess there might still be fighting for the crumb of a playoff spot that might be open to one of the outsiders, but there might actually be a resetting of priorities in those schools and less of an arms race that usually ends up being a huge drain on the school's finances. I wasn't really joking about focusing on academics; football got a unique jump start and academics have to catch up. The tier 1 chase still needs to move forward, which could lead to a merger with the medical school -- all things that would benefit lolUTSA no matter what the football team does.
Funding is likely to increase if you enter a bigger league. ECU's budget wasn't on par with AAC's. Didn't stop them from jumping. It's a stupid notion on your part.ECU's funding was quite close, especially considering their subsidy level. Then consider their history with conference mates and the fact that travel will be reduced when they will be in an Eastern division in a year -- everything I mentioned applies to their decision quite tidily.
It's very upsetting.
lol immatureBetter than your lying tbh.
Hey, you lied again. Irrational and immature.
I forgot about det one. So am I just upset in that post or all of them?
You get bent out of shape and start name calling in the face of any argument contrary to your dream.
Not true. But even if it was, how would that imply I think it would be an easy road or that we are close.
Not shutting down the program. You flat out lied about that.
I took it as that, which is why I asked you to clarify.
Money will still mean everything then. If you want to make the argument it won't, make it here.
Money for the current year will, sure. If you have the numbers for 2034 post them. If they are the same as 2013's self hate all you want.
P5 isn't your dream for lolUTSA? Just say it isn't. I will accept it is not your dream if you explicitly say so.
The word implies I would be hurt if it didn't come to be. I'm all for the P5 if it happens, if it doesn't I will still be happy to have a solid G5 program.
If the P5 becomes a reality, it's going to be tough for anyone to break in after the initial 67 or so close the door after them. It could actually turn out to be a blessing in disguise for lolUTSA and the others left out. I guess there might still be fighting for the crumb of a playoff spot that might be open to one of the outsiders, but there might actually be a resetting of priorities in those schools and less of an arms race that usually ends up being a huge drain on the school's finances. I wasn't really joking about focusing on academics; football got a unique jump start and academics have to catch up. The tier 1 chase still needs to move forward, which could lead to a merger with the medical school -- all things that would benefit lolUTSA no matter what the football team does.
You act like academics are being put on hold for the football team. UTSA has been blessed with the tools to become a top G5 program. They should and will take advantage of that, and at least see how far it takes them--could mean P5, could not.
ECU's funding was quite close, especially considering their subsidy level. Then consider their history with conference mates and the fact that travel will be reduced when they will be in an Eastern division in a year -- everything I mentioned applies to their decision quite tidily.
The avg revenue is 48 mill for the AAC. ECU's was 37 mill. It's about as close as UTSA is to the MWC average. It's not just ECU though.
Would UCF or UH turn down a Big 12 invite bc there's more 'budget parity' in the AAC?
Better than your lying tbh.
Does that mean you are a part of the lolUTSAs bc of your immaturity?
ChumpDumper
08-09-2014, 04:24 PM
I forgot about det one. So am I just upset in that post or all of them?Upset enough to keep lying.
Not true. But even if it was, how would that imply I think it would be an easy road or that we are close.Of course it's true. You got upset and started calling names.
I took it as that, which is why I asked you to clarify.You lied about it. Now you are trying to backtrack and say you weren't smart enough to figure out a simple sentence.
Money for the current year will, sure. If you have the numbers for 2034 post them. If they are the same as 2013's self hate all you want.It's easy to see what other schools are doing right now. They are spending the kind of money lolUTSA will have to if it wants to compete at that level and they are getting money from several sources which can be seen in the list I provided. It's amazing to see the kind of money a P5 bottom feeder can raise if you care to look.
The word implies I would be hurt if it didn't come to be. I'm all for the P5 if it happens, if it doesn't I will still be happy to have a solid G5 program.You're hurt just talking about it.
You act like academics are being put on hold for the football team. UTSA has been blessed with the tools to become a top G5 program. They should and will take advantage of that, and at least see how far it takes them--could mean P5, could not.Ultimately, why should they? Should they pursue P5 at all costs as long as they think it's a possibility?
I mean you can look at the kind of money schools are spending each year directly in this kind of pursuit. Houston spends about $18 million a year to keep itself from an lolUTSA level of funding. And they're probably going to compete for their conference championship. Of all the things to spend $18 million a year on, is a G5 conference championship once every few years worth it?
The avg revenue is 48 mill for the AAC. ECU's was 37 mill. It's about as close as UTSA is to the MWC average.Yep, with little net increase in travel and more money coming in from the new TV deal, things look pretty good for ECU.
Does that mean you are a part of the lolUTSAs bc of your immaturity?If you don't understand satire, I think you had better study harder at lolUTSA.
Upset enough to keep lying.
Not that I intentionally lied, but regardless lying=upset? Sounds like a lie to me.
Of course it's true. You got upset and started calling names.
Name, wasn't multiple names. :)
But regardless, quit dodging my question...how does any of that imply I saw an easy road or thought we are close?
You lied about it. Now you are trying to backtrack and say you weren't smart enough to figure out a simple sentence.
:lol what do I get out of lying? I misinterpreted it.
It's easy to see what other schools are doing right now. They are spending the kind of money lolUTSA will have to if it wants to compete at that level and they are getting money from several sources which can be seen in the list I provided. It's amazing to see the kind of money a P5 bottom feeder can raise if you care to look.
Where's the numbers for 2034? I'm waiting.
You're hurt just talking about it.
Not really.
Ultimately, why should they? Should they pursue P5 at all costs as long as they think it's a possibility?
I mean you can look at the kind of money schools are spending each year directly in this kind of pursuit. Houston spends about $18 million a year to keep itself from an lolUTSA level of funding. And they're probably going to compete for their conference championship. Of all the things to spend $18 million a year on, is a G5 conference championship once every few years worth it?
:rollin:
At all costs? Stop being all dramatic. Academics and UTSA's profile in general are improving as well, nobody is advocating sacrificing academics for the football program.
Yep, with little net increase in travel and more money coming in from the new TV deal, things look pretty good for ECU.
It was a good move on their part, despite the 'budget parity' being a better fit for them in CUSA. Thanks for agreeing that not moving up bc of budget parity is a ridiculous idea.
If you don't understand satire, I think you had better study harder at lolUTSA.
In your own words you said it was a satire of irrational, immature UTSA fans. Admittedly you are being immature and imo pretty irrational. I think my question was pretty fair tbh.
ChumpDumper
08-09-2014, 08:42 PM
lol fair
ECU is a fine example of budget parity. You simply can't refuse to accept simple numbers.
As for projecting what it will take to be a p5 team in 20 years?
More than it does now.
I will spot you several million and ask you again what is a realistic plan to get to an Iowa State level of funding with roughly the proportions shown in the list.
You have been dodging this question from the start. It's ok to say you have no idea. That is already apparent.
Bill_Brasky
08-09-2014, 09:03 PM
tard fight!!!
lol fair
ECU is a fine example of budget parity. You simply can't refuse to accept simple numbers.
As for projecting what it will take to be a p5 team in 20 years?
More than it does now.
I will spot you several million and ask you again what is a realistic plan to get to an Iowa State level of funding with roughly the proportions shown in the list.
You have been dodging this question from the start. It's ok to say you have no idea. That is already apparent.
Oh look you dodged every single one of my questions.
Then had the audacity to demand an answer to something that's unknown. Answer mine, they are simple questions.
ChumpDumper
08-09-2014, 11:27 PM
Not that I intentionally lied, but regardless lying=upset? Sounds like a lie to me.OK, I'll accept you don't understand simple English without multiple readings.
But regardless, quit dodging my question...how does any of that imply I saw an easy road or thought we are close?You never say anything different.You just trot out the chamber of commerce spiel and say "The future's so bright! So bright!" and consider that a supported argument.
:lol what do I get out of lying? I misinterpreted it.This is one reason people say lolUTSA.
Where's the numbers for 2034? I'm waiting.Hell, use last year's numbers. How does UTSA get there?
At all costs? Stop being all dramatic. Academics and UTSA's profile in general are improving as well, nobody is advocating sacrificing academics for the football program.What if it comes to that? Are you willing to have the school spend the same kind of money Houston does to support their athletic program?
That's a simple yes or no question for you.
It was a good move on their part, despite the 'budget parity' being a better fit for them in CUSA. Thanks for agreeing that not moving up bc of budget parity is a ridiculous idea.Thanks for not understanding what goes into the budget. lolUTSA again.
Feel free to answer my questions if you think you understand them. You can always use that excuse now.
Yeah, you are still dodging. As soon as you answer them we can continue with the conversation.
ChumpDumper
08-09-2014, 11:48 PM
Yeah, you are still dodging. As soon as you answer them we can continue with the conversation.Answered them all.
Do you have some others -- or did you just not understand what I wrote?
Answer these clearly and directly:
1. Me supposedly getting upset+thinking the future is bright...how does that prove I see an easy and short road? Especially when I've explicitly said I wouldn't bet on reaching P5. :lol
2. I am talking about UTSA's 2034 numbers, where are they? I want to see how much they improved from 2013's numbers and how close/far they are from the P5 bottom teams' 2034 numbers.
(You didn't understand what I meant, that is a reason people lolutsa!)
ChumpDumper
08-10-2014, 01:01 AM
Answer these clearly and directly:
1. Me supposedly getting upset+thinking the future is bright...how does that prove I see an easy and short road? Especially when I've explicitly said I wouldn't bet on reaching P5. :lolNo matter what you said, your rage at simple devil's advocate play speaks volumes about your attitude towards your P5 dream.
2. I am talking about UTSA's 2034 numbers, where are they? I want to see how much they improved from 2013's numbers and how close/far they are from the P5 bottom teams' 2034 numbers.
(You didn't understand what I meant, that is a reason people lolutsa!)Your question is what their numbers are going to be in 2034?
Your question is pretty stupid. It is impossible to answer.
Is this the way you think discussions go? If you just fail to understand everything anyone else says and ask incredibly stupid lolUTSA questions, you win the internet?
My question is a very practical one, how is UTSA going to raise their level of funding to the point it could enter the P5?
They have to raise their level of funding to reach the point they could enter the P5 -- so how? Other schools have their ways -- what are lolUTSA's?
Thanks for not answering in advance.
1. I called you a homo once, yet I'm in a rage? Quit being so dramatic. Anyways, is this what you consider proof? 'You called me a homo so that proves you think we are close to P5 level.'
You should've studied harder at lolUTSA and learned what proof is!!
2. Really? Shit, here I was thinking you were actually going to provide the 2034 numbers for me. That's kinda the point...you have no idea how the UTSA program will look like in two decades. You are using 2013 numbers to 'prove' P5 status is impossible in 2034 and beyond.
Do you understand what I've been trying to tell you now, lolUTSA?
ChumpDumper
08-10-2014, 01:23 AM
1. I called you a homo once, yet I'm in a rage? Quit being so dramatic. Anyways, is this what you consider proof? 'You called me a homo so that proves you think we are close to P5 level.'
You should've studied harder at lolUTSA and learned what proof is!!Still so angry. you threw logic out the window long ago.
I have yet to see anyone show any realistic plan to break into P5, so i'm going to say it's impossible until someone provides a reason to believe otherwise. You will not be that someone.
2. Really? Shit, here I was thinking you were actually going to provide the 2034 numbers for me. That's kinda the point...you have no idea how the UTSA program will look like in two decades. You are using 2013 numbers to 'prove' P5 status is impossible in 2034 and beyond.
Do you understand what I've been trying to tell you now, lolUTSA?I understand you have no idea how any program can try to raise its funding to a level where it could enter P5, so you try to waste time with empty rhetoric. No one knows what UTSA's numbers will be, but there is clear evidence of what it would have to be to get into the P5.
So how do they get there from where they are now?
So far your answer is "Wait 20 years." which is about as lolUTSA as it gets.
I expect you to try and dodge it again. It's OK: you have no idea. You proved that.
1. dodged again
What does you thinking it is impossible have to do with me supposedly thinking it is easy? You're all over the place on this one. :lol
2. Uh the program blows up and merchandise sales, season ticket sales and overall attendance increase. Prices can be raised for the last two. Maybe a third tier deal pops up. More donors step up. SA business leaders embrace the program. A jump to the AAC brings in more TV money, etc. You act like it's rocket science.
There's all sorts of possibilities that are all dependent on how the program grows. But of course neither of us have any idea how much it will grow sho why go into details of things that depend on that unknown? Quit being an lolUTSA smh.
ChumpDumper
08-10-2014, 01:55 AM
1. dodged again
What does you thinking it is impossible have to do with me supposedly thinking it is easy? You're all over the place on this one. :lolOK, you think it's possible. Show me who they do it.
2. Uh the program blows up and merchandise sales, season ticket sales and overall attendance increase. Prices can be raised for the last two. Maybe a third tier deal pops up. More donors step up. SA business leaders embrace the program. You act like it's rocket science.You act like it's still the easiest thing in the world.
1) Blow up.
2) ?????
3) P5!
There's all sorts of possibilities that are all dependent on how the program grows. But of course neither of us have any idea how much it will grow sho why go into details into things that depend on that unknown? Quit being an lolUTSA smh.There are existing case studies in the chart I linked -- programs that moved up. You're pretty much describing Boise State, which makes about four times what UTSA does in ticket sales and contributions after blowing up -- yet after all its success is still a good $20 million short of P5 bottom feeder status.
Rutgers moved up, but It's not like they "blew up" and everyone in Jersey sang kum ba ya and gave them all their money.Rutgers just shoved another $20 million into the athletic budget to make the jump. That's why I asked you directly if UTSA would ever be in a position to do that kind of thing or if it would be worth it.
Your answer, again, is "Wait 20 years and unknowns will just happen!" lolUTSA
OK, you think it's possible. Show me who they do it.
I've said there's a slight chance way down the line. I just listed several things that need to come together to make it happen. Why do you keep deflecting though? You're going around in circles instead of just admitting that I never claimed UTSA is close atm or that getting there would be easy.
You act like it's still the easiest thing in the world.
1) Blow up.
2) ?????
3) P5!
:lol WTF? That slight chance is dependent on the program blowing up, so I'm considering it a given when I give you a way for how it COULD happen. Nobody is claiming its easy or a given though.
There are existing case studies in the chart I linked -- programs that moved up. You're pretty much describing Boise State, which makes about four times what UTSA does in ticket sales and contributions after blowing up -- yet after all its success is still a good $20 million short of P5 bottom feeder status.
Rutgers moved up, but It's not like they "blew up" and everyone in Jersey sang kum ba ya and gave them all their money.Rutgers just shoved another $20 million into the athletic budget to make the jump. That's why I asked you directly if UTSA would ever be in a position to do that kind of thing or if it would be worth it.
Your answer, again, is "Wait 20 years and unknowns will just happen!" lolUTSA
If Boise State was located in SA/bigger market instead of Idaho they'd be P5 imo.
TCU and Utah got called up. UCF is probably next in line.
You need to work on your lolUTSA comprehension skills!!
ChumpDumper
08-10-2014, 02:57 AM
I've said there's a slight chance way down the line. I just listed several things that need to come together to make it happen. Why do you keep deflecting though? You're going around in circles instead of just admitting that I never claimed UTSA is close atm or that getting there would be easy.You are fighting like hell to keep any chance alive on this board.
:lol WTF? That slight chance is dependent on the program blowing up, so I'm considering it a given when I give you a way for how it COULD happen. Nobody is claiming its easy or a given though.What percentage chance are you giving UTSA to be a P5?
I say practically zero.
If Boise State was located in SA/bigger market instead of Idaho they'd be P5 imo.What P5 conference needs the San Antonio market?
TCU and Utah got called up.TCU was already spending P5 money and has over a billion dollar endowment.
Utah's spending was on par with Washington State right after joining. They also have an academic profile that fits perfectly in the PAC.
UCF is probably next in line.Why?
If the Big 12 isn't expanding, no one else needs UCF. If UCF ends up not being ranked this season, are they still next in line?
You are fighting like hell to keep any chance alive on this board.
Does that mean you are fighting like hell to kill it?
What percentage chance are you giving UTSA to be a P5?
I say practically zero.
Small. 5-10% if I had to quantify it. Too many unknowns atm for anything higher.
What P5 conference needs the San Antonio market?
TCU was already spending P5 money and has over a billion dollar endowment.
Utah's spending was on par with Washington State right after joining. They also have an academic profile that fits perfectly in the PAC.
Why?
If the Big 12 isn't expanding, no one else needs UCF. If UCF ends up not being ranked this season, are they still next in line?
Did the B1G really need the NY market? Pretty sure they were making the most money even w/o Rutgers. The Big 12 doesn't need to expand but I'm guessing it will eventually. UCF makes the most sense. The SA market would make sense too if a program of that caliber was currently there.
Regarding Boise State, their numbers would be bigger if they were located in a bigger market. Their budget probably wouldn't have been much different than Utah's, especially since they actually grew a small national following which Utah never did.
ChumpDumper
08-10-2014, 09:37 AM
Boise State would never make the PAC under any circumstances. Schools like Utah have a draw outside its immediate market which is why UTSA would be of dubious import to the big 12. They already have the market. They needed TCU at the time to stay viable as a conference and that school met the funding and academic criteria.
I can see Notre Dame and BYU getting calls well before UCF. Unless UCF pulls a Rutgers and throws another $20 million on the fire per year.
I'm not sure they want to lose that much money. How much money do you think UTSA should be willing to lose per year pursuing a p5 berth?
I agree about Boise St. If they were in a bigger market though things would be different, aside from the obvious the amount of applicants would also be higher...that would allow them to be more selective and improve their academic standards--which is another problem of theirs.
What you are saying about the Big 12 already having a footprint in SA makes sense, but couldn't that be said for the B1G and NY? When you are a Top 3 conference and on national TV you have a footprint almost anywhere. It's not a glaring need as much as it is just pure greed imo. ND and BYU would be ahead of UCF, but obviously they're special cases that might not even want to be in a conference if they don't have to.
UH kinda sorta reached tier-one along with Tech, so I don't think what they are doing is 'at all costs'. I'd be cool with getting the subsidy down to an AAC level (the avg not UH level)and hovering around that area throughout the process.
ChumpDumper
08-10-2014, 08:43 PM
What you are saying about the Big 12 already having a footprint in SA makes sense, but couldn't that be said for the B1G and NY? When you are a Top 3 conference and on national TV you have a footprint almost anywhere.I am not aware of the penetration of the B1G Network into the the Mid-Atlantic, but I would bet they picked up some carriers east of Philly with the Rutgers addition.
It's not a glaring need as much as it is just pure greed imo. ND and BYU would be ahead of UCF, but obviously they're special cases that might not even want to be in a conference if they don't have to.Sure, and the Big 12 is in the best position to pick up any of these teams and really the only one who would really use a Florida school if they thought it was worth it.
UH kinda sorta reached tier-one along with Tech, so I don't think what they are doing is 'at all costs'. I'd be cool with getting the subsidy down to an AAC level (the avg not UH level)and hovering around that area throughout the process.I don't really see a practical way of getting beyond that. Student fees are about as high as they are ever going to be and I'm not sure the UT system is going to allow running losses much higher than a school like UTEP currently is. Hell, P5 could be a total nonstarter with the Board of Regents. There are only a few systems with more than one school in P5, and all the competing systems in Texas could make the regents question why they should allow a school in the system to compete with UT Austin.
I dunno, I'm going to enjoy lolUTSA sports even if they never move out of C-USA.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.