It's not a SEC love-fest - it's judicious speculation. The UGA recruiting classes from 2007 through 2011 are ranked by Rival as: #9, #7, #6, #15, #5 and #5. Boise State's recruiting classes over the same time are all unranked.
They've lost to Colorado and UCF already THIS year? I was not referring to UGA over powering the Bronco O-line. What I posted was that THIS year Moore is NOT going to be able to STRETCH THE FIELD to open up his intermediate and short passing game. This plays right into the strength of EVERY SEC front 7... and when a safety steps up - it becomes a front 8.
Petersen knows this. Look for Boise to throw deep early and if they can this do this successfully...it MIGHT allow Moore's under game to get started. We shall see but my feeling is that unless the Bulldogs turn the ball over, lose some key personnel early in the game or start drinking at half time... They will win this game.
Kellen Moore is a great QB and Petersen operates is the full coaching package but... Boise has NO deep ball game this year and that means they will not be able to stretch the field as in seasons past. Moore's underneath passing game (so important to previous Bronco successes) is going to struggle. In addition, this is an SEC front 7 - not an ACC front 7 - and certainly not a WAC or MWC front 7. UGA will win this game - outright.
Posted Saturday July 30, 2011, About: CFL vs. NCAA
UR onit Default
The College All-Star game was cancelled (by the NFL owners) because of the injuries to the All-Stars. The game was played between the current NFL champion and the all-stars. The pros treated the game as an exercise to [i]"introduce"[/i] the incoming rookies to pro ball. Their [i]introductions[/i] often resulted in severe injuries to high priced and prized draft choices (some whose careers were ended before they started).
The average age of a CFL player is 28 the average age of an NCAA player is 20. There is huge difference in physical maturity between a 28 year old man and a 20 year old boy. *
Schools today advertise year-around that there has never been a more [i]"level playing field"[/i] in college athletics. At the same time the coaches spout hackney comments about [i]"working their butts off to do the best job possible for the institution and the fans."[/i] This may or may not be true but because it is out there it give rise to the following questions.
If the field is so level why then do the same schools, from the same conferences excel year after year? And what exactly do the coaches mean by the use of the term [i]"best possible"[/i] job?
People believe that when success follows success year after year, must be a reason - and that reason is cheating.
Fair enough JRM - none of the guys you mention here have two heads. (At least not a second head they can't tuck into their shirt.)
However.. ...there are questions surrounding Kelly and his program's and off-field issues; Pellini and his on-field anger management issues; Peterson and "sleep-over-gate" issues and ; what-is-his-name (David Shaw) is-not-a-big-name and is an unknown who has yet to coach a game at Stanford.
That leaves Sherman. Not crazy, but he is currently serving in the "Gerald Ford" role after replacing Franchione and the shenanigans he and his staff were conducting. Plus doing well is not an option a tOSU, doing great is the only box not grayed out.
I know, you know all this JRM, but I thought I would just officially throw it out there.
The integrity of the entire Buckeyes football program has been bloodied. Since there is too much honor, reputation and tradition (not to mention financial athletic survival) at stake; the next coach must have the squeakiest clean resume in the history of squeaky clean. In fact anyone who shake the hand of the next coach, should be considered to have receive a sacrament by the Catholic Church and been medically vaccinated against all disease by the CDC. There is not a big name out there that fills this requirement.
Athletic scholarships are for all costs incidental to attending the university for the purpose of education. TVs DVD players, game consoles, telephones, etc. do not fall into this category (interestingly, computers do). Unless the school were willing to do this for the entire student body (let alone all athletes under scholarship) it would be found providing preferential treatment to a select group of students and hence in violation of Title IX.
You are correct about the universities preserving their status, if they break off their athletic departments and allow them to run as a business. However, running the athletic department for profit is not feasible.
The current system generates profits because of their tax exempt status and the small (zero) labor cost of their athletes. Losing their two most proprietary advantages will not generate enough revenue. Eventually, out of need, the game, having lost its cultural niche, will evolve into minor league football... ...and we all know how much money minor league sports generate.
My drink of choice on Friday - the lime margarita. Have a good one JRM.
For SDST, 1.4 million (21.8% of their football revenue) came from "outside support," not 300k. Moreover, nearly 13.8 million of their 26.1 million overall athletic revenue was generated from student fees, contributions and direct institutional support. This "outside support" constitutes a whopping 52.7% of their overall athletic revenue.
Again, mandating more financial expenditures for school athletic departments, would result in unintended consequences for the university at large and the ceasing of their athletic department's existence.
Check out the data from the Dept of Education. [url=http://tinyurl.com/2cyszzh]Click here.[/url] What it would mean is a huge financial hit!
The research budget at an AAU institution dwarves (by an order of magnitude) that of their athletic department. Of the 37 AAU institutions that field Division 1 (FBS) teams 34 of them are in the Big 6 conferences (only Buffalo, Rice and Tulane aren't). All of this funding arrives at the school's doorsteps as - non-taxable bequests. It is this revenue stream that is most importantly in jeopardy should the universities be declared non-charitable organizations.
Already upstream the major (academic and athletic) revenue flow, the Wee 5 conference schools would be forced to do more than cut a few programs - they would be forced to drop almost all their programs to the club level. (From past remarks, current NCAA Pres. Emmert actually endorses such a policy.)
While most schools expect to and have always subsidize their athletic department to some extent with charitable contributions; the theoretical goal is to have them be self-sufficient. The recent trend shows they are in fact moving in the opposite direction and that the percent of these subsides is growing at an alarming rate. Currently, most schools, "generate" 25% of their athletic revenue from "donations." A loss of this revenue stream would be catastrophic for all schools.
As sound a fit as Jim Harbaugh would be with the university, the program and the alumni, he apparently isn't coming back. He is the only hire would welcomed by all three.
Enough though he played for and coached under Schembechler and presumably understands the university, the program and the alumni, Les Miles has become a clown. His act is wearing thin in Baton Rouge and [i]Michigan Man[/i] or not - it will not play well in Ann Arbor. His hire could potentially be more disastrous than Rodriguez'.
Brady Hoke coached under Schembechler, but is not viewed as a [i]Michigan Man[/i] by the university, the program and the alumni. His hiring would be disappointing to the [i]holy trinity[/i] and regarded with the same mistrust that met the Rich Rod regime 3 years ago.
(norka) - Ladybirds point here is valid. As an example, the NCAA did away with regional and national championship consolation games because making young athletes perform in a devalued role before they had fully recovered from the ephemeral physiological effects of losing a [i]"big game"[/i] was found to have a detrimental effect on their mental health.
Maybe 'Bama [b]SHOULD[/b] have been able to better focus, but respected and excepted studies show that this is not always the case and many times actual harmful to the participants.
We know you are a big, tough bear - the rest of us can't always live up to the standards you set. :)
Petersen knows this. Look for Boise to throw deep early and if they can this do this successfully...it MIGHT allow Moore's under game to get started. We shall see but my feeling is that unless the Bulldogs turn the ball over, lose some key personnel early in the game or start drinking at half time... They will win this game.
The College All-Star game was cancelled (by the NFL owners) because of the injuries to the All-Stars. The game was played between the current NFL champion and the all-stars. The pros treated the game as an exercise to [i]"introduce"[/i] the incoming rookies to pro ball. Their [i]introductions[/i] often resulted in severe injuries to high priced and prized draft choices (some whose careers were ended before they started).
The average age of a CFL player is 28 the average age of an NCAA player is 20. There is huge difference in physical maturity between a 28 year old man and a 20 year old boy. *
*See note about College All-star Game.
If the field is so level why then do the same schools, from the same conferences excel year after year? And what exactly do the coaches mean by the use of the term [i]"best possible"[/i] job?
People believe that when success follows success year after year, must be a reason - and that reason is cheating.
Oh, you said, "decent coach" ...My bad.
However.. ...there are questions surrounding Kelly and his program's and off-field issues; Pellini and his on-field anger management issues; Peterson and "sleep-over-gate" issues and ; what-is-his-name (David Shaw) is-not-a-big-name and is an unknown who has yet to coach a game at Stanford.
That leaves Sherman. Not crazy, but he is currently serving in the "Gerald Ford" role after replacing Franchione and the shenanigans he and his staff were conducting. Plus doing well is not an option a tOSU, doing great is the only box not grayed out.
I know, you know all this JRM, but I thought I would just officially throw it out there.
The current system generates profits because of their tax exempt status and the small (zero) labor cost of their athletes. Losing their two most proprietary advantages will not generate enough revenue. Eventually, out of need, the game, having lost its cultural niche, will evolve into minor league football... ...and we all know how much money minor league sports generate.
My drink of choice on Friday - the lime margarita. Have a good one JRM.
For SDST, 1.4 million (21.8% of their football revenue) came from "outside support," not 300k. Moreover, nearly 13.8 million of their 26.1 million overall athletic revenue was generated from student fees, contributions and direct institutional support. This "outside support" constitutes a whopping 52.7% of their overall athletic revenue.
Again, mandating more financial expenditures for school athletic departments, would result in unintended consequences for the university at large and the ceasing of their athletic department's existence.
What it would mean is a huge financial hit!
The research budget at an AAU institution dwarves (by an order of magnitude) that of their athletic department. Of the 37 AAU institutions that field Division 1 (FBS) teams 34 of them are in the Big 6 conferences (only Buffalo, Rice and Tulane aren't). All of this funding arrives at the school's doorsteps as - non-taxable bequests. It is this revenue stream that is most importantly in jeopardy should the universities be declared non-charitable organizations.
Already upstream the major (academic and athletic) revenue flow, the Wee 5 conference schools would be forced to do more than cut a few programs - they would be forced to drop almost all their programs to the club level. (From past remarks, current NCAA Pres. Emmert actually endorses such a policy.)
Crimson's point is most important and salient.
However, Rich Rod's diametric cultural approach at Michigan would have been [i]tolerated[/i] had he won, beat Ohio State, and gone to BCS bowls.
Enough though he played for and coached under Schembechler and presumably understands the university, the program and the alumni, Les Miles has become a clown. His act is wearing thin in Baton Rouge and [i]Michigan Man[/i] or not - it will not play well in Ann Arbor. His hire could potentially be more disastrous than Rodriguez'.
Brady Hoke coached under Schembechler, but is not viewed as a [i]Michigan Man[/i] by the university, the program and the alumni. His hiring would be disappointing to the [i]holy trinity[/i] and regarded with the same mistrust that met the Rich Rod regime 3 years ago.
They will be doing this again in 4 years.
Maybe 'Bama [b]SHOULD[/b] have been able to better focus, but respected and excepted studies show that this is not always the case and many times actual harmful to the participants.
We know you are a big, tough bear - the rest of us can't always live up to the standards you set. :)