Catchall Deion Sanders Thread

juraitwaluzka said:
In the end, this may simply be indicative of the human condition. It seems very similar to the political landscape for example, which makes sense as the college football machine fundamentally probably isn't much different than the political machine, just yet another corrupt institution we have invented.
Click to expand...

I agree it's indiciative of the human condition, but I wouldn't take as cynical of a view. People wanting to make money isn't a bad thing -- it's the reason the world works.

We all love the fact that we can watch dozens of college football games a weekend with each game in crystal clear HD showing views from 10 different cameras and teams that play at a really high level thanks to expensive training and coaching. None of that happens without the motivation of money. So to me it's not quite fair when people say that money is ruining or corrupting college football, because money is the only reason it exists as we know it.

Yeah it's sad that college football is not as good as it was before they figured out how to monetize it quite so effectively, but I'm not going to begrudge people wanting to be paid as much as they can for their work because that's brought us so many good things even if it does also have some negative effects. And because I sure as hell try to get as much money as possible for my own work.
 
andrew said:
I agree it's indiciative of the human condition, but I wouldn't take as cynical of a view. People wanting to make money isn't a bad thing -- it's the reason the world works.

We all love the fact that we can watch dozens of college football games a weekend with each game in crystal clear HD showing views from 10 different cameras and teams that play at a really high level thanks to expensive training and coaching. None of that happens without the motivation of money. So to me it's not quite fair when people say that money is ruining or corrupting college football, because money is the only reason it exists as we know it.

Yeah it's sad that college football is not as good as it was before they figured out how to monetize it quite so effectively, but I'm not going to begrudge people wanting to be paid as much as they can for that work because that's brought us so many good things even if it does also have some negative effects.
Click to expand...

That's a good take and I generally agree. I mean I don't like the corruption, things could be better, but that same thing could be said for many things involving groups of humans. Plenty of historical examples, the church for instance, I guess humans are just corruptible at the core.

This goes back to my original assertion that I watch college football because I enjoy Georgia Tech football, it's a life long tradition that I still enjoy. I don't have much interest in the rest of it anymore like I used to. It's not some boycott or anything like that, basically it comes down to my time is valuable, Georgia Tech football for half a day on a Saturday is worth it, sitting in front of the TV watching some other teams that I don't care about when I could be out doing other stuff if not, but I don't begrudge anyone who enjoys this and certainly understand their frustrations because it doesn't have to be the way that it is (although I guess you could argue that human entropy dictates that actually it does).
 
Nehru Jacket said:
I think college football is very happy to be the minor league of the NFL. If the NFL had a minor league such as professional baseball does, immediately the quality and TV dollars for college football would start going down.
Click to expand...
I don’t know that this is true, but if it is, is that a bad thing? It’s the money that has ruined college football.

College football fans will still support their teams just like they do in other sports. I cannot imagine Alabama fans not supporting their teams. They won’t stop putting them on TV. Maybe the dollars go down some, but is that a bad thing?
 
juraitwaluzka said:
Maybe, but how many viewers would an NFL minor league actually draw? I'm skeptical because every other non-NFL pro league has failed to even make a dent, and it's not like minor league baseball is a big attraction, but then again neither is college baseball so who knows.

There has to be some more compelling reason than uniform cheering, college football gives many people a connection to something that they've been following their whole lives.
Click to expand...

If the product is good and of quality, people will watch
xflboard.com

XFL Television Ratings - UFL News and Discussion

XFL television ratings
xflboard.com xflboard.com

This is why the CFB is dead or dying argument is laughable bc viewership is continuing to rise and the on field product is still high level
 
juraitwaluzka said:
I'm skeptical because every other non-NFL pro league has failed to even make a dent
Click to expand...
edit - dang - someone else posted bout this while i was typing,, still needs highlights tho
.
I have to agree that XFL and USFL ,etal haven't done well.
Lingerie League was great when it was on normal TV, now it's elsewhere,
but LFL would have a chance to gain market share if televised where easily viewable
this season standings
www.xfl.com

Home

www.xfl.com
some teams sure have impressive tight ends
highlights
 
ibeeballin said:
If the product is good and of quality, people will watch
xflboard.com

XFL Television Ratings - UFL News and Discussion

XFL television ratings
xflboard.com xflboard.com

This is why the CFB is dead or dying argument is laughable bc viewership is continuing to rise and the on field product is still high level
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks for supplying the numbers. What do you think the numbers would have to be in order for a non NFL pro league to be sustainable long term? Thus far none have accomplished long term success other than NCAA and NFL. The XFL hasn't done that yet, they haven't been around long enough to say (this iteration at least), but who knows it might in the end. I don't see anyone unseating NCAA and NFL anytime soon, which I'm guessing is not the aim of the XFL, but it would useful to define what the goal of any such alternative league would be as that would be ultimately what success is be defined by. The quality has to be good for people to watch, definitely agree with that, but long term sustainability is a more complicated equation as now you are trying to solve for altering people's behaviors, getting them to spend time on that instead of something else (life is busy, few have tons of free time available).

As it pertains to this discussion though, with respect to there being an official NFL minor league system, what do you think the impact on college football would be if there was an official NFL minor league system like with MLB vs 3rd party alternatives such as the XFL?
 
ibeeballin said:
If the product is good and of quality, people will watch
xflboard.com

XFL Television Ratings - UFL News and Discussion

XFL television ratings
xflboard.com xflboard.com

This is why the CFB is dead or dying argument is laughable bc viewership is continuing to rise and the on field product is still high level
Click to expand...
Who is saying “college football is dying?” College football is very much alive, it’s just changing. Many feel not for the better. That’s where the debate lies, not whether or not it is dying.

There are many fans of a college team, who make that team their identity, and want their team to get all the money to improve competitive advantage so they can get to vicariously improve their identity. These are usually sidewalk fans or alumni from schools that do not have a strong academic identity. There are exceptions of course.
Then there are many alumni who see college athletics as academic peers who play the game representing their university. The identity moves away from money to a shared college experience. That shared experience has been being strained for years, but now it’s broken it.
It’s not college football now. The connection with the college itself is as minimal as it can be. There is zero shared experience now.
 
andrew said:
I agree it's indiciative of the human condition, but I wouldn't take as cynical of a view. People wanting to make money isn't a bad thing -- it's the reason the world works.

We all love the fact that we can watch dozens of college football games a weekend with each game in crystal clear HD showing views from 10 different cameras and teams that play at a really high level thanks to expensive training and coaching. None of that happens without the motivation of money. So to me it's not quite fair when people say that money is ruining or corrupting college football, because money is the only reason it exists as we know it.

Yeah it's sad that college football is not as good as it was before they figured out how to monetize it quite so effectively, but I'm not going to begrudge people wanting to be paid as much as they can for their work because that's brought us so many good things even if it does also have some negative effects. And because I sure as hell try to get as much money as possible for my own work.
Click to expand...
 
I believe when people say cfb will not be as “good” they really are saying “balanced” and “losing hope” of having the ability to move from the middle of the pack to the top, on occasion. Minus that, most wouldn’t be up in arms now. It’s the fear of the “haves” getting a death grip on the playoffs while the rest rattle around the mid layers.

if the nil system brought more parity, it would be an easier sell.

That said, with far fewer players on the court, strangely cbb may see increased parity as a result of nil and the active portal. (more St Peters, fewer dooks)

my dos centavos..
 
Nothing has changed other than more people are now aware that the entire sport has been fixed by those who were suppose to run it. I’ve understood this for decades. Now, more people simply see it and are going thru their personal “freakout” revelation. I welcome NIL and the portal because they are the least corrupt iterations of the sport we’ve ever seen.

You know what was corrupt - the NCAA turning a complete blind eye to cheating under their rules. Did UGA win the 1980 Natty on their own? Of course not. They bought Herschel. Same as Auburn with Cam. And Bama in between. The entire sport was fixed in a way to give certain bread winning teams cover. Also, the transfer process was fixed. Remember when some players had to sit a year while others were allowed immediate eligibility? I do.

It isn’t surprising that as the NCAA loses its grip on power to the TV execs that NIL and the portal have arrived which can level the playing field if schools use them. TV wants good games not boring blowouts. A lot of you may not be old enough to remember when college football was awful because half the games were complete blowouts by the protected teams. The 80’s were awful watching Nebraska, Bama, Oklahoma, etc destroy teams. Heck, GT had huge blowouts back in the day.

As Andrew pointed out above, money runs it all. And finally, someone (TV execs) with more financial incentive than the NCAA and the corrupt bowl system has taken control of the sport. I think it’s fantastic. Now, I just hope my school decides to take part in the new system of NIL and using the portal. If they don’t then we’ll be having to subscribe to some obscure app to watch GT play UAB.
 
OptionJacket said:
. A lot of you may not be old enough to remember when college football was awful because half the games were complete blowouts by the protected teams.
Click to expand...

Seems like it the game has gone (back to) this way the last 5-7 years.

Even if a school wants to use the NIL opportunity, most schools won’t be able to compete with the really big programs that have tons of alumni/sidewalk fans more than willing to shell out lots of cash for a winning team.
 
moochie said:
I believe when people say cfb will not be as “good” they really are saying “balanced” and “losing hope” of having the ability to move from the middle of the pack to the top, on occasion. Minus that, most wouldn’t be up in arms now. It’s the fear of the “haves” getting a death grip on the playoffs while the rest rattle around the mid layers.

if the nil system brought more parity, it would be an easier sell.

That said, with far fewer players on the court, strangely cbb may see increased parity as a result of nil and the active portal. (more St Peters, fewer dooks)

my dos centavos..
Click to expand...

But It did bring parity. NIL and the portal allowed guys like TCU & Tulane have incredible years, saved Mike Norvell job by brining in guys like Verse & Trey Benson, & brought USC back relevancy. Teams will not be able to sit on 5*s like years past, so that depth is no longer there for those teams unless you can operate like Kirby Smart & Ryan Day has
 
ibeeballin said:
But It did bring parity. NIL and the portal allowed guys like TCU & Tulane have incredible years, saved Mike Norvell job by brining in guys like Verse & Trey Benson, & brought USC back relevancy. Teams will not be able to sit on 5*s like years past, so that depth is no longer there for those teams unless you can operate like Kirby Smart & Ryan Day has
Click to expand...
Exactly. The portal is a great equalizer if teams use it smartly and embrace it. A major hurdle are fans who are simply holding onto an antiquated view of college athletics bemoaning the days of watching a player for 4 years. Those days are long gone. Luckily, the smart coaches have figured out that one and done portal guys can fill holes better than a 3 star freshman.
 
ibeeballin said:
But It did bring parity. NIL and the portal allowed guys like TCU & Tulane have incredible years, saved Mike Norvell job by brining in guys like Verse & Trey Benson, & brought USC back relevancy. Teams will not be able to sit on 5*s like years past, so that depth is no longer there for those teams unless you can operate like Kirby Smart & Ryan Day has
Click to expand...
The recent game between the best and second best teams in America a few months ago isn’t really helping your parity argument.

The Tulane example was nice but the other teams in your sample set are hardly the orphanage football team. OSU, USCw, the mutts, F$U? Those are your parity examples?
 
00Burdell said:
The recent game between the best and second best teams in America a few months ago isn’t really helping your parity argument.

The Tulane example was nice but the other teams in your sample set are hardly the orphanage football team. OSU, USCw, the mutts, F$U? Those are your parity examples?
Click to expand...

Now go back & read where i said UGA has been the best organization in the new portal/ NIL era. That game is not an indictment on parity but just how good the mutts are. Duckers had 25 guys drafted in 2 yrs

FSU was in the brink of its 4th consecutive losing season ala GT without the portal same with USCw on its 3rd. Clemson reign is dead and they will feel the affects of not embracing the portal.
 
ibeeballin said:
Now go back & read where i said UGA has been the best organization in the new portal/ NIL era. That game is not an indictment on parity but just how good the mutts are. Duckers had 25 guys drafted in 2 yrs

FSU was in the brink of its 4th consecutive losing season ala GT without the portal same with USCw on its 3rd. Clemson reign is dead and they will feel the affects of not embracing the portal.
Click to expand...
I don’t need to go back and read it because I read it the first time - you basically said they are showing everyone else how its done. That’s fine. But if the traditional powers are leaving the rest of college football behind, I’m scratching my head as to how you are supporting the position that NIL is “leveling the playing field” When it looks to me like it’s doing the exact opposite.
Unless by parity, you meant that now, a kid can get a car and an envelope from 25 schools instead of just 3 or 4 like the old days.
 
00Burdell said:
I don’t need to go back and read it because I read it the first time - you basically said they are showing everyone else how its done. That’s fine. But if the traditional powers are leaving the rest of college football behind, I’m scratching my head as to how you are supporting the position that NIL is “leveling the playing field” When it looks to me like it’s doing the exact opposite.
Unless by parity, you meant that now, a kid can get a car and an envelope from 25 schools instead of just 3 or 4 like the old days.
Click to expand...

Yall keep making these blanket statements. Who are the traditional powers? So traditional powers like Nebraska and Miami going to leave everyone behind?

Kansas, Oregon St, and Tennessee drastically improved drastically and there were a lot more competitive games/upsets last season
 
ibeeballin said:
Yall keep making these blanket statements. Who are the traditional powers? So traditional powers like Nebraska and Miami going to leave everyone behind?

Kansas, Oregon St, and Tennessee drastically improved drastically and there were a lot more competitive games/upsets last season
Click to expand...
A few teams improving drastically does not mean there is parity, that happened before the portal too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top