Playoff Question...

[mikebigg]

Not trying to turn this into a SWAC vs the rest of 1AA debate about the playoffs. I would like to hear from those schools who have hosted playoff games in the past, specifically about the $30K minimum guarantee/75% of net receipts bid. Do any of yall find this to be a bit excessive...especially the 75% of net receipts part. I could deal with the $30K guarantee to host but the other deal seems unfair!

[*****]

Why does it seem unfair to you?

[eaglesrthe1]

Not trying to turn this into a SWAC vs the rest of 1AA debate about the playoffs. I would like to hear from those schools who have hosted playoff games in the past, specifically about the $30K minimum guarantee/75% of net receipts bid. Do any of yall find this to be a bit excessive...especially the 75% of net receipts part. I could deal with the $30K guarantee to host but the other deal seems unfair!

The playoffs are designed to be a zero sum event. The NCAA doesn't make money from the whole affair, it just attempts to put the tournament on and come out of it unscathed. Of course some games are better attended than others and the extra $$$ go towards covering the deficits at lesser attended events.

Using Montana as an example… they bring in good crowds and thus dollars for the NCAA, which the NCAA then turns around and covers the costs at other games where it comes up short, thus breaking even. A Montana fan/official could choose to look at this in two ways.

First, if Montana were to be able to capitalize on the potential extra three home games, their coffers would be fuller for it.

I would like to point out that the effect of this would be that the NCAA would either quickly lose their ass under this scenario and the playoffs would cease to exist, or... the only places (and teams for that matter) that could participate would be those that could guarantee that each individual game would be an financial success.

Or the second way that a Montana fan/official could look at it is that school/players/fans have the potential to participate in up to four extra football games for minimal/no cost (or even small profit) to the school while playing for the accolades that come with being the NCAA champs.

It seems to me that to not participate because of the potential money that a school could make, when not participating ensures that you will make nothing is poor logic, especially when the costs of participating are zero if a school wants it to be. IOW, the benefits surely outweigh the costs.

[mikebigg]

Why does it seem unfair to you?

I don't understand why teams in 1AA football playoffs are required to pay 75% of the net receipts to the NCAA. Maybe I am confused...please enlighten me on how/why such an arrangement isn't one-sided in the NCAA favor. Perhaps this is one of the reason the D1A schools do not advocate a playoff system... With the bowl arrangements, they make and keep the money for playing in the post season.

There has got to be something that I'm not seeing here! I know yall are all too intelligent to feel that this is a fair arrangement. As Denzel stated in the movie Philadelphia, will someone please explain this to me as though I am a 4 year old. Help me to understand why the Presidents and AD's of 1AA allow their players to be exploited in such a manner for the benefit of the NCAA.

Perhaps someone that hosted a game last year can tell me if they made any profit AFTER giving the NCAA 75% of the Net Receipt (still wondering what "items" are subtracted from Gross Receipts to arrive at Net Receipts) from the gate. Does the NCAA also get to keep the concessions? God forbid if that's the case!

I'm not trying to be a "Richard" or bash the playoffs (in theory). Playing for the championship in a tourney is actually kinda cool. But I don't see how giving up 75% makes sense...unless I'm really missing something that SO FAR has not been explained. Not even by someone as knowledgeable and saavy as Ralph!

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

[mikebigg]

The playoffs are designed to be a zero sum event. The NCAA doesn't make money from the whole affair, it just attempts to put the tournament on and come out of it unscathed. Of course some games are better attended than others and the extra $$$ go towards covering the deficits at lesser attended events.

Using Montana as an example… they bring in good crowds and thus dollars for the NCAA, which the NCAA then turns around and covers the costs at other games where it comes up short, thus breaking even. A Montana fan/official could choose to look at this in two ways.

First, if Montana were to be able to capitalize on the potential extra three home games, their coffers would be fuller for it.

I would like to point out that the effect of this would be that the NCAA would either quickly lose their ass under this scenario and the playoffs would cease to exist, or... the only places (and teams for that matter) that could participate would be those that could guarantee that each individual game would be an financial success.

Or the second way that a Montana fan/official could look at it is that school/players/fans have the potential to participate in up to four extra football games for minimal/no cost (or even small profit) to the school while playing for the accolades that come with being the NCAA champs.

It seems to me that to not participate because of the potential money that a school could make, when not participating ensures that you will make nothing is poor logic, especially when the costs of participating are zero if a school wants it to be. IOW, the benefits surely outweigh the costs.

What?!!! Let's keep this simple... So you are saying that for every $20 collected at the gate, the NCAA should collect $15!!!! Ok if it means that much to yall then fine by me. Under this scenario, I am glad that my school doesn't participate. I just don't think it's fair to the schools or the players.:twocents:

[eaglesrthe1]

What?!!! Let's keep this simple... So you are saying that for every $20 collected at the gate, the NCAA should collect $15!!!! Ok if it means that much to yall then fine by me. Under this scenario, I am glad that my school doesn't participate. I just don't think it's fair to the schools or the players.:twocents:

Mike, the flip of that is that when GaSoU goes on the road for a playoff game, the NCAA foots the bill. When GaSoU goes to the title game, the NCAA foots the bill. When GaSoU hosts, the NCAA foots the bill for that too. The way that they pay for it is that they get the largest part of the gate. If the attendance at the game were 0, then GaSoU would be out 30k, and the NCAA would be out the rest. Like I said, the NCAA isn't making any money.

Don't worry about it not being fair to the players, they play for the game, not for money. xlolx I've yet to hear any Eagle player say "I don't want the game to be played in Statesboro...the school won't get paid!"


Under this scenario, I am glad that my school doesn't participate.

My question is: How much money do you make when you don't?

[mikebigg]

Mike, the flip of that is that when GaSoU goes on the road for a playoff game, the NCAA foots the bill. When GaSoU goes to the title game, the NCAA foots the bill. When GaSoU hosts, the NCAA foots the bill for that too. The way that they pay for it is that they get the largest part of the gate. If the attendance at the game were 0, then GaSoU would be out 30k, and the NCAA would be out the rest. Like I said, the NCAA isn't making any money.

Don't worry about it not being fair to the players, they play for the game, not for money. xlolx I've yet to hear any Eagle player say "I don't want the game to be played in Statesboro...the school won't get paid!"

No the NCAA does not foot the bill... the NCAA just handles the money! There is a difference. But thanks for responding... I just don't agree.

[Tod]

No the NCAA does not foot the bill... the NCAA just handles the money! There is a difference. But thanks for responding... I just don't agree.

I was under the impression that the NCAA does, in fact, foot the bill for the expenses, up to a certain number of people. Any more, and the team/school foots the bill. Is this not correct?

[*****]

... My question is: How much money do you make when you don't?They (just three teams from the SWAC) make the profit off their Bayou and Turkey Day games, plus any from the conference champ game. I have been all around this topic for years (Mike, check the archives if you want detail, I gave it just this summer) and it is silly to keep debating it. The NCAA (ie: member schools) is not profiteering off the D-I football playoffs, plain and simple. Same for any D-I championship (basketball is the only one I know of that makes a profit). BS teams took their ball and went bowling, good for them. They award a crystal ball but the NCAA championship and all those accolades go to the tournament winner (App St has collected million$). Play if you want or just forget about it.

[*****]

I was under the impression that the NCAA does, in fact, foot the bill for the expenses, up to a certain number of people. Any more, and the team/school foots the bill. Is this not correct?They do. They even increased the amount they reimburse starting this year.

[Tod]

They do. They even increased the amount they reimburse starting this year.

Ah! I remember now. :nod:

[mikebigg]

...They award a crystal ball but the NCAA championship and all those accolades go to the tournament winner (App St has collected million$). Play if you want or just forget about it.

I think you meant the NCAA 1AA championship goes to the tournament winner. The NCAA does not recognize a 1A national championship! The reason being is because they don't sanction it...the reason they don't sanction it is because they don't make money from it. Let's not be naive... they sanction the D1 basketball tourney cuz they make money from it. They sanction the D1AA football playoff cuz they make money off it. They sanction the NCAA baseball tournament because they make money off it. If the NCAA doesn't make money, to them it doesn't make sense. They are smart!

I'm satisfied with the answers that have been given. As stated previously, thanks to all for responding. Good luck to all those who participate.

[UNHWildCats]

I think you meant the NCAA 1AA championship goes to the tournament winner. The NCAA does not recognize a 1A national championship! The reason being is because they don't sanction it...the reason they don't sanction it is because they don't make money from it. Let's not be naive... they sanction the D1 basketball tourney cuz they make money from it. They sanction the D1AA football playoff cuz they make money off it. They sanction the NCAA baseball tournament because they make money off it. If the NCAA doesn't make money, to them it doesn't make sense. They are smart!

I'm satisfied with the answers that have been given. As stated previously, thanks to all for responding. Good luck to all those who participate.

OK its I-AA not 1-AA.

The NCAA doesn't recognize a I-A Champion, because there is no NCAA Championship. The Champions are crowned by the BCS and AP.

[*****]

I think you meant the NCAA 1AA championship goes to the tournament winner. The NCAA does not recognize a 1A national championship! The reason being is because they don't sanction it...the reason they don't sanction it is because they don't make money from it. Let's not be naive... they sanction the D1 basketball tourney cuz they make money from it. They sanction the D1AA football playoff cuz they make money off it. They sanction the NCAA baseball tournament because they make money off it. If the NCAA doesn't make money, to them it doesn't make sense...No, there is no
1AA Championship

It is I-AA

You are one mixed up person if you don't understand that the NCAA is a group of it's member schools. I have seen the numbers and the NCAA DOES NOT profiteer off the tournaments they run. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. The only reason the NCAA doesn't run a I-A football tournament is because the bowl system predates them by many years. THE BOWLS run I-A. The NCAA does not recognize a I-A national championship because it is not an NCAA tournament (the only one that is not), and not a tournament AT ALL. :nod:

Don't play the games, don't get the name NCAA D-I Football Champion.

[mikebigg]

No, there is no
1AA Championship

It is I-AA

You are one mixed up person if you don't understand that the NCAA is a group of it's member schools. I have seen the numbers and the NCAA DOES NOT profiteer off the tournaments they run. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. The only reason the NCAA doesn't run a I-A football tournament is because the bowl system predates them by many years. THE BOWLS run I-A. The NCAA does not recognize a I-A national championship because it is not an NCAA tournament, and not a tournament AT ALL. :nod:

Ralph,

Am I mixed up because I don't agree with the payout OR do you consider me mixed up because you do? If you feel confident that the NCAA doesn't get an unfair share of the proceeds then that's cool. I will not try to convince you otherwise. I just had a concern because I don't feel that the NCAA should be getting a 75% of the net receipt guarantee.

Seems that I struck a nerve...(Don't recall you ever referring to someone as being mixed up) but apparently this is something that is near and dear to your heart. Hope everyone enjoy their 15%...xlolx

[ngineer]

Much agreed there, Ralph. The I-AA Tournament certainly is not a money-maker. Many of the schools are not big enough, nor have sufficiently large alumni/fan base to have huge crowds, plus significant travel requirements. Yes, the schools in I-A make a lot of money, but as stated, there is no I-A national championship sponsored or sanctioned by the NCAA. And the sole reason is greed. Them that got don't want to share.
As for the 'profiteering' off of the STUDENT/athletes--at least at the I-AA, II, and III levels, the great majority are not in school treating it as the NFL's minor league. At schools in the PL, a lot of players are getting $100,000-$160,000 worth of education..Nuthin' to sneeze at...:read:

[UNHWildCats]

Ralph,

Am I mixed up because I don't agree with the payout OR do you consider me mixed up because you do? If you feel confident that the NCAA doesn't get an unfair share of the proceeds then that's cool. I will not try to convince you otherwise. I just had a concern because I don't feel that the NCAA should be getting a 75% of the net receipt guarantee.

Seems that I struck a nerve...(Don't recall you ever referring to someone as being mixed up) but apparently this is something that is near and dear to your heart. Hope everyone enjoy their 15%...xlolx

Since your so convinced the NCAA walks away with a boatload of money from the I-AA playoffs, then why don't you show us some proof.

[*****]

... Am I mixed up because I don't agree with the payout OR do you consider me mixed up because you do? ...Hope everyone enjoy their 15%...xlolxAre you saying that you don't understand that the NCAA is a group of it's member schools? That is the mixed up person I referred to. You, though, seem to have failed to comprehend what myself and others have blatantly laid out. The 75% barely (if ever) pays for the tournament to run. I have no idea what "Hope everyone enjoy their 15%" or your laughing at it means.:confused:

[Tod]

Ralph,

Am I mixed up because I don't agree with the payout OR do you consider me mixed up because you do? If you feel confident that the NCAA doesn't get an unfair share of the proceeds then that's cool. I will not try to convince you otherwise. I just had a concern because I don't feel that the NCAA should be getting a 75% of the net receipt guarantee.

Seems that I struck a nerve...(Don't recall you ever referring to someone as being mixed up) but apparently this is something that is near and dear to your heart. Hope everyone enjoy their 15%...xlolx

Nice math. :rolleyes:

The NCAA takes 75% of the net profits (meaning AFTER expenses). So, the school does, in fact, make some money. Whether or not it's enough to cover the playoff bid would depend on the school, I guess. They use that money to pay the travel expenses of every traveling team (16 total times, 8 + 4 + 2 + 2, unless one of the finalists happens to be playing at home), because otherwise those schools may not be able to afford the travel expenses. Look at JMU in 2004. They won every game ON THE ROAD. How are they supposed to pay for that if not through this system?

If you think the NCAA is raping I-AA in the playoffs, what do you suggest they're doing with the money? Stealing it?

[McNeese75]

Hope everyone enjoy their 15%...xlolx

And we hope you enjoy that ever so exciting bowl thing you do in November :giveadamn:

[mikebigg]

Nice math. :rolleyes:

The NCAA takes 75% of the net profits (meaning AFTER expenses). So, the school does, in fact, make some money. Whether or not it's enough to cover the playoff bid would depend on the school, I guess. They use that money to pay the travel expenses of every traveling team (16 total times, 8 + 4 + 2 + 2, unless one of the finalists happens to be playing at home), because otherwise those schools may not be able to afford the travel expenses. Look at JMU in 2004. They won every game ON THE ROAD. How are they supposed to pay for that if not through this system?

If you think the NCAA is raping I-AA in the playoffs, what do you suggest they're doing with the money? Stealing it?

Nice Logic. :rolleyes:

In your first sentence you stated that the NCAA takes 75% of the net profits (by the way thanks for attempting to explain net profits...that was nice. Incorrect but nice.) See net profits is not after expenses. That's Gross Profit. Net profit is Gross Profit minus Taxes... Also the Bylaws said 75% of Net Receipt. I know cuz I read the link that Ralph sent me in another discussion on the same subject. Net Receipts means that the NCAA gets that prior to any expenses (and yes taxes) are deducted.

No I do not think the NCAA is stealing the money. Is that how you debate and issue or discuss a topic? Nice attempt to distract but let's stay focused. Plus why would they steal something that's being handed over to them so freely?

You asked how it could be done differently... I doubt if you really wanted my "answer" but I was hoping that one of you would ask. Thanks...

1. Home Team pays the NCAA the $30K minimum fee same as now to cover official expenses etc.

2. Visiting team receives $75K guarantee for each road game

3. Home team receives 100% of gate receipts

4. Championship game both teams receive 33% of Gross Profit for participating in the game.

Get back with me now! xcoffeex

[mikebigg]

And we hope you enjoy that ever so exciting bowl thing you do in November :giveadamn:

Try to stay focused...sometimes personal sentiment can cause folk to lose perspective. Remember my first post:

"Not trying to turn this into a SWAC vs the rest of 1AA debate about the playoffs. I would like to hear from those schools who have hosted playoff games in the past, specifically about the $30K minimum guarantee/75% of net receipts bid. Do any of yall find this to be a bit excessive...especially the 75% of net receipts part. I could deal with the $30K guarantee to host but the other deal seems unfair!"

:nono:

[McNeese75]

1. Home Team pays the NCAA the $30K minimum fee same as now to cover official expenses etc.

2. Visiting team receives $75K guarantee for each road game

3. Home team receives 100% of gate receipts

4. Championship game both teams receive 33% of Gross Profit for participating in the game.

Get back with me now! xcoffeex

Ok, I'll try to stay focused as it seems you are not doing the Bayou Classic vs playoff thing sooooooo

Where does the 75K guarantee for each road game come from?

[*****]

... 1. Home Team pays the NCAA the $30K minimum fee same as now to cover official expenses etc.Hold it right there. $30K does not pay for 130 people traveling, lodging, eating, transporting, etc. not to mention staffing, advertising and media fees. It just doesn't. Have you been to a playoff game this century and seen this stuff up close? It is EXPENSIVE!

[mikebigg]

Ok, I'll try to stay focused as it seems you are not doing the Bayou Classic vs playoff thing sooooooo

Where does the 75K guarantee for each road game come from?

I was thinking that teams currently pay around $75K to visiting teams during the regular season. Is this amount about right? Well, say McNeese is one of the host teams. The Cowboys would have no qualms with paying $75K to an opponent, pay $30K to the NCAA and pocket whatever the profit is for that game.

The visiting team gets $75K to cover expenses. Kinda tight but I doubt if they get more than expenses paid under the current scenario. Trust me, when the SWAC teams see the potential money to be made, the SCG becomes a thing of the past. Especially Jackson State with that 61K seat stadium and a fanbase that's would be rabid to host a playoff game. A&M would participate in the playoffs and might possibly bid to host a game if ranked and seeded that high.

[*****]

I was thinking that teams currently pay around $75K to visiting teams during the regular season. Is this amount about right? Well, say McNeese is one of the host teams. The Cowboys would have no qualms with paying $75K to an opponent, pay $30K to the NCAA and pocket whatever the profit is for that game...Okay, so does $105K pay for those 130 folks? What happens when teams don't make $105K? Do they then eat the cost? Under the current plan they only need to clear $30K. After that they make money.