all about this story “Project Rudy” The CBS/247Sports college football slack channel was buzzing with the topic Tuesday afternoon. Especially ahead of Thursday’s Big Ten-SEC meeting in Nashville.. After about 50 messages in the Slack thread, I realized this was pretty compelling content. What follows is a lightly edited version of our conversation.
What do athletic clubs gain by chasing big bucks?
Chris Hammer: Can someone please answer a question that I’m kind of curious about: What does it mean for athletic departments, especially the SEC and Big Ten, to be chasing so much additional revenue? Is it?
They aren’t really a commercial company. There are no shareholders to whom you are accountable other than the general concept of winning the game. If anything, it will be harder to generate additional revenue in the long run because schools will have to pay more money as part of their revenue share to athletes. Also, the common position that athletes are not employees seems increasingly ridiculous. It’s just a cycle of having to keep raising more money while crowding out so many of your peers.
Perhaps the answer is “stay ahead of the competition.” But if the revenue share is actually limited to around 22 million, why is there a need to generate so much additional revenue?
I know these athletic departments don’t run like real businesses, but what other established business brings in over 200 million a year in revenue and can spend all of it? – – But that’s what confuses me about this era of the sport.
Richard Johnson: First of all, adding $21 million overnight is not easy for most schools other than the 25 that you can think of. It will be a combination of cutting the budget and increasing revenue in some way.
But the other thing is that the cost of everything continues to rise. I personally don’t think coaching salaries will actually stop increasing now that players are paid by schools through rev shares. I think schools like to parrot that idea, but I believe the public market will prove otherwise. For many athletic programs, school contributions have already been reduced or eliminated as far as student aid is concerned. All donors also need to consider the misappropriation of donations to organizations.
Shehan Jeyarajah: It’s loss aversion. They are more worried about being left behind than what they can do with the extra money. And that impact is probably as much due to reputation as it is to actual financial impact (see Florida State or Clemson in the ACC).
I watch shows like Arkansas a lot. Their path to competing in the SEC is slim and likely impossible in a post-realignment world. When Texas A&M opened the door to Texas and DFW recruiting throughout the SEC, Arkansas lost its biggest niche. For example, if the University of Arkansas were to move to the Big 12, their combination of resources, fan support, and tradition could make them the No. 1 program. It could lead to a program actually building a better team, more success in the College Football Playoff, and a true national championship. Still, Arkansas doesn’t want to be left behind and would rather be No. 13 in the Big 12 than No. 1. They would rather lose while at the club than win and risk being left out.
Brad Crawford: Same thing in South Carolina. The Shumcocks would have had more success on the field if they had remained in the ACC, but they made money in the SEC. Several programs have done this through various SEC expansions.
Hammer: I agree with you on one point. Arkansas State is probably the better team in the Big 12. But I don’t think anyone would accept a 50% pay cut just to be in a smaller market where it’s easier to work. You get paid, you work harder, you keep getting better. That’s exactly what I plan to do at the University of Arkansas. This is a program with a history of competing for national titles this century. Most of these programs are not without proof of concept. It’s happened before.
My problem is chasing more revenue when it only complicates things for programs and sports going forward. But I know how our society works. If there’s money there, they’ll chase you.
That’s why readjustment is necessary. That’s why the NCAA and schools have gone this long without making common sense changes that would satisfy players without completely changing the sport.
But here we are.
Will interest in the sport diminish as the number of affiliated teams decreases?
John Talty: What I always say is that no one is putting up a banner saying how much revenue is going to come in. Fans want to win. It’s depressing for a team in the Big Ten or the bottom third of the SEC to know you’re making a lot of money, but so are the other teams in the conference. What is the way forward? Short of catching lightning in a bottle with a transcendental coach, it’s hard.
Jeyarajah: The other question is, does the fan base realize that they are moving out of the club? Take Auburn, a program that has played in multiple national championships over the past 15 years. For the next 10 years, they will be the 11th best program in the conference and always likely to miss a bowl. Their fans have never seen themselves that way. Vanderbilt, Purdue and Mississippi State aren’t the only ones struggling. Championship-winning teams are trying to live in a new reality. Are there any points that actually influence fan support and interest?
Talty: No one wants to hear this because the TV ratings are strong, but this is my biggest concern going forward. I don’t think we’ve really felt the effects of realignment and changes in college football yet.
Johnson: I don’t think that’s true anymore. Vandy moments are fun, but give me Alabama-Georgia over Alabama-Vanderbilt 100 times out of 100.
Talty: But what I wonder about is that it’s an inferior product to the NFL in many ways. Take away the quirky results, the wild upsets, and the tradition, and at what point is it just a watered-down NFL?
Johnson: I think the average fan doesn’t particularly know or care that the football isn’t that good. Personally, I’m interested in both for different reasons. I’ve always said I’m married to college football and dating the NFL.
CRAWFORD: For football purists, it may be an inferior product, but there are bigger plays and drama in college football.
Talty: I like college football more than the NFL. Because college football is more fun, and there’s no NFL equivalent to Shelby’s rally. But my fear is that if you take away what makes it unique, it will start to look more and more like the NFL.
CRAWFORD: I feel sorry for the fans of Group of Five. East Carolina’s die-hard fans are just as passionate as Alabama’s die-hards, but college football’s content machine leaves us with a daily dose of the Tide.
How do people become college football fans?
Jeyarajah: I dabbled in college football as a kid when Vince Young led Texas to the title, but if I hadn’t gone to Baylor during the height of college football, I’m not a college football fan. It wouldn’t have happened. Richard, I know you grew up going to games in Florida during the Urban Meyer era.
If Florida State, Baylor State, and Arkansas State were irrelevant to this sport, there’s no guarantee any of us would have this job. It’s very possible that they all follow this trajectory. Would Jeff from Tulsa care about Alabama-Georgia even if he never became an Oklahoma State or college football fan to begin with?
Brandon Marcello: I think most fans like college football because of the regional ties to nearby schools. If I hadn’t moved to Arkansas in middle school and been introduced to the Razorbacks, I would never have become a college football fan. They are here, living directly, so to speak, so I could see them and touch them. I grew up in South Mississippi, a hodgepodge of Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Alabama, and LSU fans with no real loyalty or direct ties to the universities. .
Sure, this sport is bigger than school ties, but I don’t think this sport is built on Alabama, Georgia, and Michigan fans spread across the country. That’s the NFL mentality. If that’s what the power brokers want for the sport, an inferior NFL Lite product will result in a lower return on investment. College football is what it is today because smaller programs pop up every few years. It has to be left there. If not, when will we get tired of the once-every-two-year mid-season matchup between Alabama and Michigan just for the money? I love cheesecake, but I can’t eat it for every meal.
Johnson: I think there’s a difference between how we got involved in college football and how this generation and the next generation will get involved in college football. And I think there’s a bigger difference between what brings people into this game and what keeps people in the future. I’d frankly call the bluff that people don’t want to see the University of Michigan play against Texas and Oregon over Bowling Greens and Rutgers overall not made for television. In-person fans (particularly students) are less interested in attending games against opponents with a 25-point lead. Yes, Vandy on Alabama is cool, and it’s cool because we haven’t seen it in 40 years. But I did take the time to play through the regular 25 versions of the game.
getty
Jeyarajah: Absolutely, but at the end of the day, there are 134 FBS schools and every school has its own passionate fans. Some have more than others, but nothing makes Alabama fans more important than San Jose State fans. What’s great about college football is the fact that history is made every week and the fact that it’s a grassroots sport. If there are 134 teams at the highest level, there are 134 paths to becoming a fan. If that number drops from 134 to 20, we have to deal with the fallout of the fact that people in Boise, Blacksburg, and Toledo may not watch at all.
Some fans might turn on the TV, watch the Alabama-Michigan game, and keep watching because they think the helmets look cool. Others turn on that game and then watch the Chiefs vs. Bengals game and think those teams are cooler. If people want an equal, exclusive competitive game, there’s a great league for that. It’s called the NFL. If you want to see something you’ve never seen before every week, college football is for you.
