Instant RePAY

Throwing the challenge flag on the NCAA and its giant Scrooge McDuck swimming pool of money.

[instantrepay-blog]

Why do you like to watch college football? It’s a simple question without an easy answer. “Umm, because its AWESOME and I LOVE IT!!!!” Yes Bob, but WHAT makes it awesome and WHY do you love it? Traditions? Rivalries? Tailgating? “Amateurs” playing for love of the game? I think it boils down to two reasons. You’re affiliated with a certain school(s) as a student, alumni, supporter, staff, local resident, etc. Or you appreciate the skill of elite trained athletes performing at the highest non-professional level. Or maybe you fit in both categories. I feel like most people in the first group are loyalists who would follow their team(s) regardless of which recruits they sign or how many Heisman Trophies they win. And unless they’re being selfish, devoted fans shouldn’t get upset if players act in their best interests and skip meaningless bowl games. However, if you prefer watching the cream of the crop, you may take issue with someone missing a postseason exhibition because of the injury risk. But if you think NFL prospects can’t lose draft value and thus millions of dollars by being injured, ask Notre Dame’s Jaylon Smith. Sure, he had a sizeable insurance payout, but missed out on $10 million-plus as a potential first round pick. Seems fair. Why is it like this? What if, like every other major professional sport, there were legitimate minor league or international alternatives for football players to turn pro after high school? Or scholarship athletes received compensation in addition to their “free education” and basic living costs? “But players already get paid enough!” people scream. Right, except that economic studies have proven big-time college athletes possess significant worth beyond just a scholarship and cost of attendance stipends. So it comes down to this: either you admit college football players have monetary value and deserve a means to earn on that value (either from university/conference revenue or through the opportunity to play in a minor league); or you maintain players have no value, and are fine with not forcing them to go to school because it won’t hurt ratings (which you know is BS). Sorry, its one or the other. Ultimately, you tune into college football for the level of enjoyment it brings. But you can’t deny the athletes’ efforts warrant more, whether it be in the form of compensation or opportunities. It may change the game, but if you don’t like it, change the channel.

[instantrepay-blog]

Let the hate flow through you

What makes a great college football rivalry? In my completely subjective and thus correct opinion, the formula is actually quite simple.

First a disclaimer: this discussion won’t include any of the service academies, mainly because the military reverence of the Army-Navy game makes any argument against pretty pointless and unpatriotic. So with those games incomparable, which rivalry is (next) best?

Here is some basic but inarguable criteria I came up with:

1. Games must be between schools in the same state

Sorry Michigan-Ohio State, you’re out.  A key ingredient to a great rivalry fan mud-slinging. But in states like Ohio, EVERYONE is a Buckeyes fan, which means you aren’t likely to see any Michigan flags in your neighborhood prompting a potential house-egging. With virtually no neighbors or co-workers to fight with, where’s the fun in that?

2. Only rivalries from California, Florida and Texas can be considered

Everyone knows these are the big three states for high school football with the top recruits every year. Sure, some elite talent leaves to play for programs in other parts of the country, but most stay close to home.

So many of the best athletes who are well-acquainted from their days of high school and youth football will be seeing each other again, and everyone knows familiarity breeds contempt. This may not be the case for guys in the Egg Bowl, Apple Cup and even the Iron Bowl, where those states just don’t have the glut of talent to draw local kids from.

3. Teams must meet the last week of each season for generally high stakes

With major college football being the only sport known to man without a legitimate tournament to determine its champion, games played the final week of the year carry significant weight. Lose, and no matter what you’ve done up to that point, your championship hopes are likely dashed. With that said, there’s only one game that follows all three of my rules…

But first, the outliers. In California, both Cal-Stanford and UCLA-USC are close, but neither rivalry is always set at the end of the schedule. In fact, recently USC has taken on its other “rival” Notre Dame (Los Angeles is so close to Indiana, no wonder they hate each other!) to close the regular season.

So that leaves us with Texas-Texas A&M…oh wait, conference realignment destroyed that annual classic. It would’ve made the cut, but sorry, money and greed won out over tradition. Which means all we have left is our winner:

FLORIDA-FLORIDA STATE. The Best Rivalry in College Football. Hate on.

[sportsgeekonomics]

The is Nothing New Under the Sun

In case you think the current dissonance between college sports as revenue generators and “amateurism” are somehow new, consider this from a 1929 edition of the Cornell Alumni News:

No wonder the system [of college football]  cracks and strains. The Carnegie report proves at vast statistical length that there is a frightful bulge when you try to jam a twenty-million-dollar industry into a vacant-lot ideology.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose!  

The issue at the time was whether recruiting athletes to attend so they would play football, and even more scandalously, promising them discounts on tuition as an inducement, would render the sport somehow less than fully amateur. The conclusion was:

Where football is allowed to dominate, the players render services which have an enormous money equivalent. As everything else in the world is run, they are entitled to money payment for their services.

[sportsgeekonomics]

Imaginary Supreme Court Opening Argument

Since the O’Bannon case will find out whether the Supreme Court will, or won’t, hear the matter, I’ve been imagine if I were Ted Olsen or David Boies or anyone of the superstars who I hope would support O’Bannon, and this is how I imagined how I would open my argument to the Court.  Hope you enjoy a glimps into my little fantasy world.

The NCAA’s fundamental argument is rooted in an insoluble contradiction.  On the one hand, it argues that the NCAA must fix athlete prices because the NCAA’s customers, consumers of college sports, universally don’t want college athletes to be paid.  On the other hand, the NCAA argues that if schools and conferences were allowed to address market demand unencumbered by the restraints in suit, they would attempt to please their customers, consumers of college sports, they would pay their athletes.  Both of these views cannot be true.

If we assume that consumers would truly hate college athletics played by college students who were also paid, no competent business man or woman in charge of a college sports conference would even feel tempted to allow its members to pay athletes.    Conversely, if we assume that, absent the NCAA’s rule, those same savvy conference commissioners would begin to compete for consumers’ eyeballs and dollars by raising the level of pay used to attract the best college athletic talent, then we can only conclude that the level of payments made are unrelated to demand.

This latter conclusion was in fact what the District Court in O’Bannon concluded, as a matter of both fact and law, that the restraint on payments in suit was not a primary driver of demand.  This same conclusion is supported by the NCAA’s vehement insistence that absent its rules, a bidding war for talent would break out.  It is only our willingness to give the myth of “amateurism” such deference that we refuse to bring our logical faculties to full bear that can let us pretend that the forces that would drive up college athlete pay spring from a market where higher pay means lower interest.

[daily-sports]

Inspired by a post yesterday, my poor artistic take on if the NBA divided into the Northern and Southern Conferences

[instantrepay-blog]

Addition by Addition

Three percent. Of the 128 top-tier (FBS/Division 1A) college football programs, only four – or 3.1% – are selected for the championship-determining “College Football Playoff.” Doesn’t seem like a lot right? By contrast, the “March Madness” men’s basketball tournament admits 68 of 347 teams, a much higher ratio of 19.6%.

That’s not all. The Division 1 baseball tournament consists of 64 out of 298 schools (21.5%). Even more ludicrous is the second highest level of football, the FCS/Div. 1AA, which by comparison has around the same number of members (125) and allows 24 TEAMS in its championship tournament (19.2%)!

Looking at these numbers, one would think expanding the “Playoff” would be a logical conclusion. Given other sports permit around 20% of teams into postseason play, it seems equitable. However as we all know, fairness isn’t what drives big-time college athletics.

Can you tell me what does?

“I’ll take MONEY for 500 Alex.”

The powers that be fear putting more teams in a tournament will:

1.      “Destroy the integrity of the regular season” by making those games “less meaningful”

2.      Decrease the number of money-swindling bowl games, because 40 wasn’t enough already

3.      Increase the amount of games tournament teams play in an already lengthy season

The first two gripes are non-issues. People didn’t stop watching college football when the “Playoff” was implemented two years ago, and bowl games can still be held as consolation prizes for other schools or serve as tournament venues as they do now.

Adding more games to the schedule, however, is a concern for student-athlete time requirements and welfare. Fortunately I’ve come up with a model I think is fair and will serve the best interests of all parties involved (even the money hoarders).

Expand to 8-team tournament

16 teams would be more inclusive but probably illogical given the glacial pace of athletic reform today. So, grant automatic berths to the five major conference champions, then have the selection committee choose one school from the lower five conferences and two at-large or “best of the rest” teams.

Theoretically (though not realistically) this gives everyone a chance at getting into the tournament. It definitely limits the amount of subjectivity present in the current model, which has no automatic qualification and is strictly by selection only.

Return to 11-game regular season

I know this sounds horrible on the surface, but consider this would likely mean just eliminating the one "cupcake" game on the schedule everyone complains about anyway. Instead, schedule games like that in August as an exhibition.

Coaches will be happy because they don’t lose the practice these games provide; fans will be satisfied assuming they aren’t charged full price to attend; players don’t have to stress about or play the entire game because it doesn’t count; and lower-level programs will still get the payouts these contests provide.

Most importantly, of course, is the lucrative conference championship game schedule won’t have to be altered in any way, so those benefactors can keep lining their pockets :)

Play tournament games throughout bowl season

Here’s an idea of what this tournament might have looked like if it was in place last season:

1. Clemson

8. Houston

Peach Bowl

4. Oklahoma

5. Iowa

Fiesta Bowl

Winners to Orange Bowl

  3. Michigan State

6. Stanford

Cotton Bowl

 2. Alabama

7. Ohio State

Sugar Bowl

 Winners to Rose Bowl

  What are your thoughts on this plan? Like it? Hate it? Change something? Let me know!

[usatodaysports]

Here are the best games to watch this week in college football

[instantrepay-blog]

After all the talk about how good the first week would be, people forgot how this would mean few good matchups the 2nd week…

[instantrepay-blog]

Unless you’re a fan of the above plantation owner’s team, you probably enjoyed the Florida State-Ole Miss Labor Day showcase on Monday. And why wouldn’t you? Everyone loves watching some football on a holiday! Unless you’re one of the athletes the following Saturday playing another game just 5 days later…

According to ESPN records, which go back to 2002, Labor Day college football games have been held every year since 2003. Because coaches don’t want to sacrifice a Saturday off so early in the season, many schools will schedule games against “lesser” teams for a few days later to give the players an “easy” win.

But sometimes disrespecting your opponent means giving them motivation to make things not so easy. In fact, there have been two instances where Labor Day participants scheduled games against lower-tier FCS/1AA schools for the following Saturday and LOST (Virginia Tech famously stumbled against James Madison in 2010 and Tulane was upset by Northwestern State in 2003).

Other teams have managed to win but had to put forth serious effort in triumphs expected to be virtually effortless. Ohio State struggled for 3 quarters against Hawaii last season before finally pulling away late. Some other nail biters:

2005: UNLV 34, Idaho 31

2006: FSU 24, Troy 17

2009: FSU 19, Jacksonville St. 9

2010: Navy 13, Georgia Southern 7

A few schools have taken notice of this trend and decided to have an off-week the Saturday after a Labor Day game. FSU followed this approach in 2013 and went on to win the National Championship. However, this season they’re back playing this Saturday against Charleston Southern, much to coach Jimbo Fisher’s chagrin.

As one of the brighter minds in football, Fisher is aware of the dangers in these short turnaround scenarios:

“I think it's ridiculous in college to ask kids to play on a Monday-Saturday, or a Saturday-Thursday, if they're truly worried about the kids. I think those games are ridiculous. I think it's unfair to them. It's not what's good to the body and everything else.”

Turns out its more than just the upsets people should be worried about.

[instantrepay-blog]

Or is the real reason "Power 5" teams and conferences are afraid to schedule FCS schools is because they're worried about getting beat? Some of these "little guys" can play ball! 🏈

[instantrepay-blog]

One of my favorite quotes from one of my favorite movies, Batman Begins, occurs when Bruce Wayne (played by Christian Bale) declares to Alfred (Michael Caine):

“People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy.”

Agree with him or not, Colin Kaepernick’s decision not to stand for the national anthem set an example that drew a lot of attention. Whether or not it will help make people less apathetic to his cause is still up for debate.

The problem is, his actions are considered by many to be offensive to the men and women who have served and continue to serve his country. Some have claimed a better use of his time and stature would be to assist in the black communities he says are being victimized.

But would that get his message across? Sure it would be the benevolent thing to do, but the media rarely reports on athletes doing community service work. Seemingly everyone is talking about Kaepernick now.

Perhaps he should’ve taken a less controversial avenue to speaking his mind, because his points have become somewhat diluted in the subsequent discussion. Yet isn’t Kaepernick’s right to free speech one of the fundamentals that’s supposed to make America great?

[instantrepay-blog]

I'll make a statement and if people don't like it, fans [don't like it]: If you don't play an FCS ... how do they make their budget? By playing a big school. How's the Division IIs make their budget? Playing an FCS. When you start taking these budgets away, where are all the high school football players gonna go? Why are they gonna play football when all these teams drop football? You're killing the sport for ego.

Jimbo Fisher, Florida State football head coach

[daily-sports]

The many colors of Rio’s olympic diving pool, in Pantone and hex

[instantrepay-blog]

Every year, in the name of an untainted “collegiate model” of athletics, billions of dollars are siphoned away from the revenue-generating (and mostly poor) athletes who play football and basketball and redirected elsewhere: toward athletic department personnel who are pursuing their own lucrative careers, toward mushrooming facilities and travel budgets

http://paperclassinc.com/the-shameful-beat-goes-on/

[instantrepay-blog]

...you may question the required academic path being a professional football player requires. It’s one more stringent and longer than any other major pro sport. Clearly, many of these kids have failed a large part by their own doing but their total inability to function in even the most athlete friendly academic environment hints that many around them have failed them as well and the effects of those combined failures have been damaging enough where no level of mentoring can...change the outcome of this high stakes chance at something better.

http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/netflixs-last-chance-u-is-a-once-in-a-decade-documentary.html

[instantrepay-blog]

I'm sorry but this picture may never get old hahahaha...and she backed it up! U S and A!

[instantrepay-blog]

6 things I noticed in 'Last Chance U' 1. Buddy Stephens may seem like an asshole to outsiders (and he is), but the sad truth is many football coaches at all levels think and behave similarly. 2. That said, I cannot fucking believe he got in a fist fight WITH A REFEREE. I'm sure somewhere in the ethos of sport a head coach has done that before, but I've never seen or heard of it. 3. ...and then he had the nerve to chastise his players for an in-game brawl. He only backpedaled after he realized he was losing the team and even some coaches. Scum. Bag. 4. While it became clear Stephens is a hypocrite who only cares about his own success, in fairness the series really showed you the strife that comes with managing a bunch of college kids who are mostly looking to improve their own situations. 5. ...but this is where the real star of the show, Brittany Wagner, shines through. It's moving to see someone who wants so badly for these players to reach their goals. This extends beyond her help in the classroom as you see her agonizing on the field every game. 6. The show really peels back the layers of college football to present a sometimes ugly picture usually not seen on ESPN. The players are students who struggle with real-life issues. Hopefully everyone's eyes were opened as you felt their pain and cheered their successes like I did.

[instantrepay-blog]

...about the ensuing RT frenzy, is that it's a hilarious and ridiculous reflection on the NCAA. Not to mention the economic restrictions the association places on college athletes. Think about it: the NCAA—which purportedly was founded to regulate player safety and supposedly exists to promote education—was in the business of policing Tweets

https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/ncaa-coaches-are-paying-recruits-with-retweets-because-they-cant-use-cash?curator=SportsREDEF