forums

An IDEA for Creating Parody in CFB

CaneFan79 said:
So who are the "select ADs?"

Sounds like most of them need to work harder by your standard:

https://www.al.com/sports/2014/08/ncaa_study_finds_all_but_20_fb.html

When is your application going in to be one of those ADs?
Click to expand...
Ask any cfo in the world if he'd like someone to control his costs, and he'd say yes. Does not mean it's legal, doesn't mean it's smart, doesn't mean it would do anything positive, certainly doesn't mean it would help his company compete. Once you realize his competitors will get the same rule, you really need to take a deep breath and think through dynamic equilibrium a bit.
 
Advertisement
Ethnicsands said:
You are really dense. And quoting TR on a subject you're a boiled ham on is really rich.

Professional sports leagues aren't in the maximize competition business, they're in the maximize value business. The NFL has some form of parity because careers are very short, contracts aren't guaranteed, revenues are heavily socialized, and rosters are relatively large (compared to the NBA and MLB).

To the contrary, baseball had a lot more 'parity' in the '80s before the current salary cap concepts were put in place. Since then, the Yankees have 5 world series titles (7 appearances), the red sox 4 and the giants 3 (4 apperances). The Cardinals have also been there 4x (2 titles).

The NBA is much less competitive. Since MJ retired from the Bulls, you have the Lakers and the Spurs with 5 titles each, the Heat and Golden State with 3 each. The Lakers have 7 Finals appearances, Heat and Spurs with 6 each, Golden State with 5. Go back to the '90s and you had the Bulls with 6 titles. The 80s was pretty concentrated too.

These leagues aren't doing 'competition.' They're doing whatever the **** they want to make money in a weird semi-oligarchical structure. Sports leagues are also franchises treated differently legally from colleges. So the NCAA wouldn't even be allowed to do what you fancy, putting aside it wouldn't do what you claim you want.
Click to expand...

Someone must have missed Braves, Dodgers, Marlins, Twins, Blue Jays, Reds, Royals, Diamondbacks, White Sox, Angels, Astros, Phillies, Nationals and even the Cubs winning WS championships

Considering that it was usually either the Lakers or Celtics who won the championship in the NBA before the salary cap, the teams you mentioned and the Rockets and Pistons are sure thankful for it.

No mention of the NHL? Since the their salary cap started in 2005, 10 different Stanley Cup Champions.

Getting tired?
 
CaneFan79 said:
Someone must have missed Braves, Dodgers, Marlins, Twins, Blue Jays, Reds, Royals, Diamondbacks, White Sox, Angels, Astros, Phillies, Nationals and even the Cubs winning WS championships

Considering that it was usually either the Lakers or Celtics who won the championship in the NBA before the salary cap, the teams you mentioned and the Rockets and Pistons are sure thankful for it.

No mention of the NHL? Since the their salary cap started in 2005, 10 different Stanley Cup Champions.

Getting tired?
Click to expand...
I don't mention the NHL because I don't give a **** about hockey. Sorry.

Your NBA response is ridiculous. I mean, truly ridiculous. Wasn't your argument about 'parity'? We don't have more parity, we just have different teams dominating. The reason is because in the NBA, a couple great players make all the difference in the world, and you have guaranteed contracts. There ain't **** that the salary cap will do to fix that. The best players are too powerful, in any case, for that to work. Shaq moved and titles followed. LeBron moved and titles followed. That's just the NBA.

In any case, we're just wasting internets at this point. Good luck with your regulation theory. It's a laffer.
 
Ethnicsands said:
I don't mention the NHL because I don't give a **** about hockey. Sorry.

Your NBA response is ridiculous. I mean, truly ridiculous. Wasn't your argument about 'parity'? We don't have more parity, we just have different teams dominating. The reason is because in the NBA, a couple great players make all the difference in the world, and you have guaranteed contracts. There ain't **** that the salary cap will do to fix that. The best players are too powerful, in any case, for that to work. Shaq moved and titles followed. LeBron moved and titles followed. That's just the NBA.

In any case, we're just wasting internets at this point. Good luck with your regulation theory. It's a laffer.
Click to expand...

Keep mouthing off CEO, CFO, dynamic equilibrium, its too funny.



Yes, you are that professor, spouting off, but not addressing the real world everyone else is trying to improve.
 
CaneFan79 said:
Keep mouthing off CEO, CFO, dynamic equilibrium, its too funny.



Yes, you are that professor, spouting off, but not addressing the real world everyone else is trying to improve.
Click to expand...

It's a great gif because you're the muttonheaded fantasy land profession with the bow-tie. That you think you're Rodney in that clip is precious.

You don't even have an argument to articulate. Cost controls don't on their own create competition - there's no reason to think they would, either. They can create more profits for some at the expense of others. There are ways for pro sports leagues to try to increase competition between franchises, but pro sports leagues don't generally care about that. They're in the money maximizing business. When that aligns with parity, okay. And in any case, it would be illegal for the NCAA to try to regulate private employment at universities. They get to regulate aspects of student athletes under the 'amateurism' guise. Not sure their regulation of how many coaches can be involved in recruiting is really legal but as far as I know it hasn't been challenged. You can be sure someone will challenge an effort to wholesale restrict employment within state universities.
 
Advertisement
Ethnicsands said:
It's a great gif because you're the muttonheaded fantasy land profession with the bow-tie. That you think you're Rodney in that clip is precious.

You don't even have an argument to articulate. Cost controls don't on their own create competition - there's no reason to think they would, either. They can create more profits for some at the expense of others. There are ways for pro sports leagues to try to increase competition between franchises, but pro sports leagues don't generally care about that. They're in the money maximizing business. When that aligns with parity, okay. And in any case, it would be illegal for the NCAA to try to regulate private employment at universities. They get to regulate aspects of student athletes under the 'amateurism' guise. Not sure their regulation of how many coaches can be involved in recruiting is really legal but as far as I know it hasn't been challenged. You can be sure someone will challenge an effort to wholesale restrict employment within state universities.
Click to expand...

Do you even realize what the original subject of this thread was? "Restrict employment within state universities" when most of the funding for the big time programs comes from booster organizations to the athletic department? Alabama Boosters, Ohio State boosters, etc. fund the athletic departments of these places with the states providing a fraction for pensions:

https://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/data/higher_ed_salary

Look up Ryan Day...He sure makes more than 450K.

Your ignorance on this subject is laughable.
 
CaneFan79 said:
Do you even realize what the original subject of this thread was? "Restrict employment within state universities" when most of the funding for the big time programs comes from booster organizations to the athletic department? Alabama Boosters, Ohio State boosters, etc. fund the athletic departments of these places with the states providing a fraction for pensions:

https://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/data/higher_ed_salary

Look up Ryan Day...He sure makes more than 450K.

Your ignorance on this subject is laughable.
Click to expand...
The opening post was a ridiculous suggestion that the discussion has clearly moved on from. Did you have another point? You're going to restrict what, exactly?
 
SFbayCane said:
I did not read thru all four pages but I'll add the two obvious items:

1) Its parity, not parody, OP.

2) The idea that the NCAA would want parity is laughable. The role of the NCAA is to protect the haves from the have-nots. In short, the role of the NCAA is similar to the role of the federal government in the war on drugs.




View attachment 141511
Click to expand...
That keeps prices of drugs artificially high. Not everybody can afford their drugs. Maybe Biden will usher in drug justice, you know, drugs for everybody.
 
Advertisement
Ethnicsands said:
Ask any cfo in the world if he'd like someone to control his costs, and he'd say yes. Does not mean it's legal, doesn't mean it's smart, doesn't mean it would do anything positive, certainly doesn't mean it would help his company compete. Once you realize his competitors will get the same rule, you really need to take a deep breath and think through dynamic equilibrium a bit.
Click to expand...
I’ll bet CFOs pay an arm and a leg for they’re drugs, just like the rest of us. And $600 from government? Hardly covers gas money out to the dealer.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top