forums

Slap Fight About Paying Players

CaneSince4Ever said:
LOL...Malik has value
Click to expand...

How? In what way?

If he cashes a single check on an active professional roster I'd be shocked.

Let's put it this way. If Al Golden was still here and Rosier was our quarterback then what do you think our record would be?
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Omega said:
CanesForever said:
So you dont believe that Miami being great onthe field has an economic advantage?
Click to expand...

What does Malik Rosier have to do with Miami being great?

The revenue stream functions mostly like the NFL nowadays. Television and bowl money flows through the conference and is distributed to the schools. The team's performance certainly helps with ticket sales and donations but that's about it.

Miami is solvent (and even in the green) regardless of how many games the football program wins.
Click to expand...

And if the conference sucks, it gets ****tier bowls and ****tier TV deals. Less money.

Adidas paid us. Bc they bought low on a brand that had been dying, and are now laughing all the way to the bank. I GUARANTEE you the exec who signed off on that deal with UM has been promoted and given a huge bonus.

UM applications went through the rough bc of gameday, aka free advertising for the school.

Alabama has literally changed their entire out of state application standard off the backs of their football success.

You are a sad Shalala worshipper. She too believed Miami just needed to be mediocre and clean cut and live off the ACC shared revenue. She was wrong, ended up headed a foundation that is dirtier than Ole Miss boosters, and now that her stink is gone we have a program (full of south florida players who you hate) to be proud of.

Take your weak *** progressive-but-scared-of-blacks crap to UF.
 
CaneSince4Ever said:
And again, if football and men's basketball were their own entities, you could pay the players.
Click to expand...

And again you keep moving closer and closer to my position.

So only revenue producing sports....

Then it'll be only revenue producing sports at revenue producing schools.

Then it'll be only the players who add value to those revenue producing sports at revenue producing schools.

Then you'll just say ***** it an realize that your whole argument was void of any rationality.
 
Omega said:
CaneSince4Ever said:
And again, if football and men's basketball were their own entities, you could pay the players.
Click to expand...

And again you keep moving closer and closer to my position.

So only revenue producing sports....

Then it'll be only revenue producing sports at revenue producing schools.

Then it'll be only the players who add value to those revenue producing sports at revenue producing schools.

Then you'll just say ***** it an realize that your whole argument was void of any rationality.
Click to expand...

You cannot play the game of football with 2 kids on your team. Do you not get this yet? In your mind you believe that literally picking any 85 kids and putting twm in uniform will generate money. It wont.

And no, your UM degree isnt made better by having a bunch of square white dudes on the team.
 
CanesForever said:
Adidas paid us. Bc they bought low on a brand that had been dying, and are now laughing all the way to the bank. I GUARANTEE you the exec who signed off on that deal with UM has been promoted and given a huge bonus.

UM applications went through the rough bc of gameday, aka free advertising for the school.

Alabama has literally changed their entire out of state application standard off the backs of their football success.
Click to expand...

You are now seemingly arguing with yourself because nobody has disputed any of these things (ie applications going up because football team is winning, etc.)
 
Omega said:
CanesForever said:
And if the conference sucks, it gets ****tier bowls and ****tier TV deals. Less money.
Click to expand...

That's a mighty fine hypothetical you got there.

I'm right and you know it.

Just move on, guy.
Click to expand...

LOLOLOL wait you think tv networks just hand out cash for poorly watched product? Ahhahahahahha

Lmfao i think you need to return to your textbooks, Jagr. The real world is laughing at you.
 
CanesForever said:
She too believed Miami just needed to be mediocre and clean cut and live off the ACC shared revenue. She was wrong, ended up headed a foundation that is dirtier than Ole Miss boosters, and now that her stink is gone we have a program (full of south florida players who you hate) to be proud of.
Click to expand...

No. She thought (rightly) that the solvency of Miami's athletic department shouldn't have to rely on year-to-year football results. No organization worth a **** would decide to run it's operations like that in the Big East if it was offered a better deal in the ACC.

You just don't like Shalala and so you fault her every move.

People who know stuff know better.
 
Advertisement
CanesForever said:
In your mind you believe that literally picking any 85 kids and putting twm in uniform will generate money. It wont.
Click to expand...

Of course it will.

The NFL, which has far less ingrained emotional support from it's fans than colleges do, hired replacement players and broke the union.

If Alabama and Tennessee were forced to suit up 85 walk-ons who played high school football but weren't offered scholarships they'd get 100,000 people to turn out.
 
CanesForever said:
LOLOLOL wait you think tv networks just hand out cash for poorly watched product? Ahhahahahahha
Click to expand...

Now you're just making up stuff.

Why would it be poorly watched? People watch for the emotional attachment they have with their school or state or region.

Three years from now Jalen Hurts will walk down a street and be a complete nobody. Why? Because Alabama will have another quarterback and the beat will go on.
 
Allow me to explain to Jagr (omega) how tv deals work:

A network presents a show/game/etc. advertisers pay for commercials during that show.

When the ratings come out, if the games/shows rated very highly, the network can charge more to the advertisers for commercial space. You see jagr, a free market! Its why superbowl commercials cost so much; more eyeballs watching.

If however the games you are presenting are bad and NOT watched (as say ACC games featuring Miami pre-Richt), then advertisers pay less to the network.

When it comes time for Disney to renegotiate a tv deal with the ACC, the ACC now can say “hey ESPN our team was your most watched Sat night game. The price is going up.”

Miami is one of the few schools that has a major following IN A MAJOR CITY. It is a massive economic boost to the ACC for future tv deals if we are kicking ***.

Now go back to the UC and jerk off to whatever Shalala portrait they have hanging up.
 
CanesForever said:
Allow me to explain to Jagr (omega) how tv deals work:

A network presents a show/game/etc. advertisers pay for commercials during that show.

When the ratings come out, if the games/shows rated very highly, the network can charge more to the advertisers for commercial space. You see jagr, a free market! Its why superbowl commercials cost so much; more eyeballs watching.

If however the games you are presenting are bad and NOT watched (as say ACC games featuring Miami pre-Richt), then advertisers pay less to the network.

When it comes time for Disney to renegotiate a tv deal with the ACC, the ACC now can say “hey ESPN our team was your most watched Sat night game. The price is going up.”

Miami is one of the few schools that has a major following IN A MAJOR CITY. It is a massive economic boost to the ACC for future tv deals if we are kicking ***.

Now go back to the UC and jerk off to whatever Shalala portrait they have hanging up.
Click to expand...

You're just making this stuff up.

Why would it be poorly watched?

90,000 people paid for tickets to see 4-6 Florida play 4-6 Florida State and the game was on an ESPN network. That game still got a 1.2 rating which is the equivalent of 2 million households.
 
Advertisement
If the NCAA could suddenly mandate that eligibility for college football would require a score of at least 1200 on the SAT (or equivalent ACT), or ended athletic scholorships entirely, fan interest in the games would not diminish one bit. In fact interest would probably increase because fans would see them as legit representatives of the university. Fans care about which TEAMS win, not who is playing. If, under this new requirement for ALL TEAMS, Miami is beating FSU and winning championships, do you care if it is with player X instead of player Y?
 
Omega said:
CanesForever said:
Allow me to explain to Jagr (omega) how tv deals work:

A network presents a show/game/etc. advertisers pay for commercials during that show.

When the ratings come out, if the games/shows rated very highly, the network can charge more to the advertisers for commercial space. You see jagr, a free market! Its why superbowl commercials cost so much; more eyeballs watching.

If however the games you are presenting are bad and NOT watched (as say ACC games featuring Miami pre-Richt), then advertisers pay less to the network.

When it comes time for Disney to renegotiate a tv deal with the ACC, the ACC now can say “hey ESPN our team was your most watched Sat night game. The price is going up.”

Miami is one of the few schools that has a major following IN A MAJOR CITY. It is a massive economic boost to the ACC for future tv deals if we are kicking ***.

Now go back to the UC and jerk off to whatever Shalala portrait they have hanging up.
Click to expand...

You're just making this stuff up.

Why would it be poorly watched?

90,000 people paid for tickets to see 4-6 Florida play 4-6 Florida State and the game was on an ESPN network. That game still got a 1.2 rating which is the equivalent of 2 million households.
Click to expand...

Lmfao you simply dont understand how TV works dude.

A 1.2 for a national rivalry game of two HUGE brand schools in major conferences IS AWFUL.

By comparison Bama-AU, which featured two top 10 squads got a 7.6!!!!

And btw, they dont get a 7.6 bc of the 90,000 yokels in the state. In fact, advertisers could give less than a **** even if the entire state watches that game. They care about if the demographic ACROSS THE COUNTRY watches. Jesus man show some humility.
 
Back
Top