(03-18-2014 01:56 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 11:28 AM)Chuck A Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 01:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 11:17 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 08:25 AM)Jet915 Wrote:  Right or wrong, I think the University Presidents are wary of adding a public school.

Yeah...the conference should really rethink that one. Let them learn the hard way, though.

I wouldn't be shocked if 10-15 years from now, the MVC is all or nearly all private schools.

Why? I wouldn't be shocked if it becomes all or nearly all public schools. In general, the publics have the most money, better facilities and better athletes (especially at the non-BCS level). Privates are the ones that are running away of hybrid private/public conferences, not the other way around. There are not enough viable privates around to do the things that the Catholic 7 did, unless you begin to bring up a bunch of Div 2 and Div 3 private schools.

Because college basketball is in trouble. The average viewer age is much older than NBA and it is less racially diverse at a time when racial diversity is increasing in the US.

I think you are going to see some of the public Valley schools trying to get on the FBS football train while they can.

College basketball is in trouble? I don't think so. The P5, the G5 and all the other FCS programs that want to move up to FBS football, are going to be in for a rude awakening! Sure the G5 and whatever other programs are "allowed" to participate will get some trickle down monies, but will it be worth it? These programs are leaving the FCS, where it's been very, very good to some (playoffs, good monies) to second class status where they'll be playing the "lottery" in trying to become bowl eligible for a god-forsaken bowl being played in Didwad, Diddy. It's not going to be the golden goose that they all think it will be.

College basketball is always going to grow. Next to soccer, it still is the fastest growing American sport. Parents are becoming more and more hesitant about letting their children play football because of being concussed and other injuries. They are diverting them to other sports, such as soccer, baseball, and yes...even basketball. Football, in the long run will suffer because of the "bigger", "faster", "stronger" culture that is becoming prevalent in the game. Concussions, after-career brain damage, dementia and other football related injuries is something the NCAA and the NFL want to go away. It has caused and will continue to cause the game to change the rules and the way it handles these issues. That, my friend, will cause college football, as well as pro football, to be in trouble. Who wants to watch "Flag Football" on a Saturday and Sunday?

College basketball is in trouble? I don't think so.

(03-26-2014 02:07 AM)Chuck A Wrote:  These programs are leaving the FCS, where it's been very, very good to some (playoffs, good monies) to second class status where they'll be playing the "lottery" in trying to become bowl eligible for a god-forsaken bowl being played in Didwad, Diddy. It's not going to be the golden goose that they all think it will be.

You may have missed the infamous Montana AD email from a few years ago. When MONTANA is worried about the FCS playoffs, and teams don't want to bid on FCS playoff home games, it's not always 'very, very good to some'. Those god-forsaken bowls give players huge schwag packages and are all televised, with nearly all drawing better ratings than most MBB regular-season games, and FCS title games. FCS semi's draw similar ratings to the D-2 finals.

I've wondered for some time how long FCS can continue and expected significant contraction. But except for private schools, the opposite is happening. FCS keeps expanding from Division II or non-football schools. The schools are willing to continue to subsidize it to get the benefits from having a football team.

(03-26-2014 02:07 AM)Chuck A Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:56 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 11:28 AM)Chuck A Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 01:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 11:17 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Yeah...the conference should really rethink that one. Let them learn the hard way, though.

I wouldn't be shocked if 10-15 years from now, the MVC is all or nearly all private schools.

Why? I wouldn't be shocked if it becomes all or nearly all public schools. In general, the publics have the most money, better facilities and better athletes (especially at the non-BCS level). Privates are the ones that are running away of hybrid private/public conferences, not the other way around. There are not enough viable privates around to do the things that the Catholic 7 did, unless you begin to bring up a bunch of Div 2 and Div 3 private schools.

Because college basketball is in trouble. The average viewer age is much older than NBA and it is less racially diverse at a time when racial diversity is increasing in the US.

I think you are going to see some of the public Valley schools trying to get on the FBS football train while they can.

College basketball is in trouble? I don't think so. The P5, the G5 and all the other FCS programs that want to move up to FBS football, are going to be in for a rude awakening! Sure the G5 and whatever other programs are "allowed" to participate will get some trickle down monies, but will it be worth it? These programs are leaving the FCS, where it's been very, very good to some (playoffs, good monies) to second class status where they'll be playing the "lottery" in trying to become bowl eligible for a god-forsaken bowl being played in Didwad, Diddy. It's not going to be the golden goose that they all think it will be.

College basketball is always going to grow. Next to soccer, it still is the fastest growing American sport. Parents are becoming more and more hesitant about letting their children play football because of being concussed and other injuries. They are diverting them to other sports, such as soccer, baseball, and yes...even basketball. Football, in the long run will suffer because of the "bigger", "faster", "stronger" culture that is becoming prevalent in the game. Concussions, after-career brain damage, dementia and other football related injuries is something the NCAA and the NFL want to go away. It has caused and will continue to cause the game to change the rules and the way it handles these issues. That, my friend, will cause college football, as well as pro football, to be in trouble. Who wants to watch "Flag Football" on a Saturday and Sunday?

College basketball is in trouble? I don't think so.

If college basketball is always going to grow why is the TV audience for the Final Four so much older than the NBA Finals audience of roughly the same size?

College basketball's audience is more like baseball's than NFL NHL or NBA.

Ask the TV execs about the millions of kids play argument. They've heard it from soccer and skateboarding for years and they still don't translate into big audiences.

The market has shown the allure of being FCS over FBS.
List of FBS moving FCS the past 30 years
_________
_________



Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(03-26-2014 07:04 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:07 AM)Chuck A Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:56 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 11:28 AM)Chuck A Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 01:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I wouldn't be shocked if 10-15 years from now, the MVC is all or nearly all private schools.

Why? I wouldn't be shocked if it becomes all or nearly all public schools. In general, the publics have the most money, better facilities and better athletes (especially at the non-BCS level). Privates are the ones that are running away of hybrid private/public conferences, not the other way around. There are not enough viable privates around to do the things that the Catholic 7 did, unless you begin to bring up a bunch of Div 2 and Div 3 private schools.

Because college basketball is in trouble. The average viewer age is much older than NBA and it is less racially diverse at a time when racial diversity is increasing in the US.

I think you are going to see some of the public Valley schools trying to get on the FBS football train while they can.

College basketball is in trouble? I don't think so. The P5, the G5 and all the other FCS programs that want to move up to FBS football, are going to be in for a rude awakening! Sure the G5 and whatever other programs are "allowed" to participate will get some trickle down monies, but will it be worth it? These programs are leaving the FCS, where it's been very, very good to some (playoffs, good monies) to second class status where they'll be playing the "lottery" in trying to become bowl eligible for a god-forsaken bowl being played in Didwad, Diddy. It's not going to be the golden goose that they all think it will be.

College basketball is always going to grow. Next to soccer, it still is the fastest growing American sport. Parents are becoming more and more hesitant about letting their children play football because of being concussed and other injuries. They are diverting them to other sports, such as soccer, baseball, and yes...even basketball. Football, in the long run will suffer because of the "bigger", "faster", "stronger" culture that is becoming prevalent in the game. Concussions, after-career brain damage, dementia and other football related injuries is something the NCAA and the NFL want to go away. It has caused and will continue to cause the game to change the rules and the way it handles these issues. That, my friend, will cause college football, as well as pro football, to be in trouble. Who wants to watch "Flag Football" on a Saturday and Sunday?

College basketball is in trouble? I don't think so.

If college basketball is always going to grow why is the TV audience for the Final Four so much older than the NBA Finals audience of roughly the same size?

College basketball's audience is more like baseball's than NFL NHL or NBA.

Ask the TV execs about the millions of kids play argument. They've heard it from soccer and skateboarding for years and they still don't translate into big audiences.

The market has shown the allure of being FCS over FBS.
List of FBS moving FCS the past 30 years
_________
_________



Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

The NBA is the allure for youngsters, not necessarily college hoops. There are no "stars" in college hoops to develop and grow a fan base for the sport. The "one-and-done" and before that, going straight to the League damaged the age viewership, which I don't necessarily agree is all what you've said it is. Be that as it may, once the NBA negotiates that players stay in school for two years that would help the sport and cause the fan base/viewership to become a bit younger.

Can you imagine how popular college hoops would really be and the immediate shooting star popularity of players if they had stayed in school at least two years. The players I have in mind are Kevin Durant and Derrick Rose.

(03-26-2014 04:45 PM)Chuck A Wrote:  Can you imagine how popular college hoops would really be and the immediate shooting star popularity of players if they had stayed in school at least two years. The players I have in mind are Kevin Durant and Derrick Rose.

Those two guys have done pretty dam well for themselves for playing "only" one year of college ball, don't you think?

Durant and Rose are good examples of something that Rick Pitino says he tells to his best players about turning pro early: "If you want to take care of your family, go to the NBA. If you want to take care of my family, stay in school."

(03-26-2014 05:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 04:45 PM)Chuck A Wrote:  Can you imagine how popular college hoops would really be and the immediate shooting star popularity of players if they had stayed in school at least two years. The players I have in mind are Kevin Durant and Derrick Rose.

Those two guys have done pretty dam well for themselves for playing "only" one year of college ball, don't you think?

Durant and Rose are good examples of something that Rick Pitino says he tells to his best players about turning pro early: "If you want to take care of your family, go to the NBA. If you want to take care of my family, stay in school."

Durant and Rose most certainly have. But can you imagine how much better it would be for a player like Nerlens Noel (who?) Vander Blue and some others who were budding college stars whose lights flickered out (in the case of Blue) or are quite dim right now (in the case of Noel)? Blue, while getting better at the college level would have undoubtedly built a nice fan base while drawing those young viewers (his fans) to continue to watch the college game.

A player like Anthony Davis, could've used another year both to develop his game better and to gain that star quality at the college level. Staying in school would have, without question, helped Austin Rivers.

My point is I believe the college game would be greatly helped with an influx of younger viewers if the young hot stars say around for at least two years.