HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

NCAA-O'Bannon Case: using athlete images w/o compensation (#508, dismissal denied)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-12-2013, 12:51 AM
  #276
Brodie
Moderator
King at the Wall
 
Brodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 11,827
vCash: 500
but Kev, we all know that the current 207 team D1 isn't long for this world. Within a decade, 15 years at most, the BCS schools will be on their own and the rest of college athletics can get on with it following the D3 or NAIA model without the BCS schools and their overabundance of football revenue driving up the costs of women's lacrosse coaches and assistant compliance directors, etc.

Your scenarios are already happening, whether the players are getting their cut of video game and TV rights deals or not. All the rest of us want is to see the players get their fair share out of the coming settlement.

Brodie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 03:30 AM
  #277
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brodie View Post
but Kev, we all know that the current 207 team D1 isn't long for this world. Within a decade, 15 years at most, the BCS schools will be on their own and the rest of college athletics can get on with it following the D3 or NAIA model without the BCS schools and their overabundance of football revenue driving up the costs of women's lacrosse coaches and assistant compliance directors, etc.

Your scenarios are already happening, whether the players are getting their cut of video game and TV rights deals or not. All the rest of us want is to see the players get their fair share out of the coming settlement.
Yeah, it's probably going to happen. That doesn't make it GOOD for anyone involved.

Aside from the fact that what they get (37% of SRR, plus perks) is pretty fair as is; people are going to be SHOCKED at how much better it used to be with the "small schools" involved.

Without the non-FBS teams in basketball, their basketball tournament is going to to suck.
-- 45 of ESPN's Top NCAA Basketball Tournament Moments involved schools that don't have BCS football.

-- I'm sure very few if any of you guys watch the NCAA Women's Tournament... but it's BORING AS HELL (not just because it's women playing but) because the top teams always beat the crap out of everyone else.

With no media scrutiny, the women's tournament rarely invites any non-BCS schools that didn't win their conference tournament (Only TWO this year and only THREE first round upsets happened. Creighton (in an upset), Dayton (screwed in seeding) and Delaware (screwed in seeding) all won their first round games).

The Men's Tournament had eight non-BCS at-larges and nine Round of 64 upsets this year. 13 of the teams in the Round of 32 teams didn't have BCS football.

One of the NCAA women's committee members actually suggested SHRINKING the women's tournament because of a "lack of parity."
-- when they had teams like 27-3 Toledo, the #25 team in the RPI, and three other Top 50 RPI teams from smaller conferences SITTING AT HOME while they took BCS teams with worse records, worse RPIs and plenty of games vs top teams that proved they couldn't compete!

The BCS Conference teams that make the the lower seeds of the Men's NCAA Tournament have great records, but because they are members of a Powerful Big Conference, no one ever talks about how they didn't deserve to be in the Tournament. But if you really LOOK at a school like Pittsburgh (24-9 last season), you'd realize that when you take out all the teams that don't sponsor FBS football… Pittsburgh was 3-7 last year.

Instead, they act surprised when Wichita State (7-3 vs 10 good teams entering the tournament) plays Pitt in the NCAA Round of 64 and absolutely PIMP-SLAPS them. (If only I was allowed to gamble!)


And despite only playing ONE team a year against the FCS, a Super Division I MIGHT expose FOOTBALL for the dog and pony show it actually is.
-- Only 23 BCS teams had WINNING RECORDS vs other BCS teams. Another 28 only had winning records BECAUSE they played FCS and the poorer, non-BCS teams.

So if 15-20 schools in FBS (from the Sun Belt, MAC and C-USA) decide they can't afford to pay players and drop to FCS; the BCS schools that were #44-54 out of 120 schools (7-5, 7 home games) are suddenly going to be #44-54 out of 105 schools (5-7, 6 home games).

Just losing the home games is going to piss off the donors.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 05:09 AM
  #278
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,566
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
I'm deadly serious, and mean no insult. But do you know how Division I works? Do you think Gonzaga and MVSU are in Division I because they are trying to win BCS Bowl games?
Yes, but didn't realize MVSU was 1 and not A and yes I know that Gonzaga is a basketball only power my point was that (and one you continue to miss) is that programs like Gonzaga will be fine in a scenario where players receive more of the revenue and where MVSU (which already is in a lower level) will continue on as is...I just do not see the doom and gloom you are projecting.

VOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 05:17 AM
  #279
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,510
vCash: 500
Oh, one more thing... if you think college football isn't just a dog and pony show, name one other sport in which coaches take another job offer and leave BEFORE the post-season starts.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 05:56 AM
  #280
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
Yes, but didn't realize MVSU was 1 and not A and yes I know that Gonzaga is a basketball only power my point was that (and one you continue to miss) is that programs like Gonzaga will be fine in a scenario where players receive more of the revenue and where MVSU (which already is in a lower level) will continue on as is...I just do not see the doom and gloom you are projecting.
I'm not missing your "point." You haven't made one, just given your opinion that they'll be "fine."

It's an opinion I easily dismiss because you haven't shown any understanding of their current situations (1 and not A? What does that mean?).

I think you don't see the "doom and gloom" because you don't actually see college athletics in FCS and non-football D-I.

This might be a fun topic for you to argue on a message board; it's the world I live in.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 03:48 PM
  #281
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,566
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
I'm not missing your "point." You haven't made one, just given your opinion that they'll be "fine."

It's an opinion I easily dismiss because you haven't shown any understanding of their current situations (1 and not A? What does that mean?).

I think you don't see the "doom and gloom" because you don't actually see college athletics in FCS and non-football D-I.

This might be a fun topic for you to argue on a message board; it's the world I live in.
NCAA D-1 A are what the current FBS teams are/were known as...

Quote:
1 - The three Divisions (I, II, III) remain. Division I has new rules and teams are forced to either start paying, or reclassify down to Division II.

Those who try and stay would have a hard time competing, because recruiting gets harder when BCS programs have big money, and the rest of FBS, FCS and non-football schools don't have as much to PAY THEIR STUDENTS.

Non-football teams like Gonzaga would be in much better shape than FCS teams, because they'd have to pay far fewer players. But it's still tougher for them. Because the teams who aren't as good in basketball right now can simply pay their players more than Gonzaga can.
Perhaps a few FBS schools would have a problem paying but not the majority. Forget the FCS schools because according to you, they are irrelevant in the sporting world...so they would be minimally impacted by the creation of a new FBS that pays its players.

Quote:
- There's a NEW DIVISION of ONLY SCHOOLS with FBS Football Programs
What makes you think a new division schools of only FBS participants would want to freeze out a Gonzaga in basketball....would not happen..

What exactly is your interest here KevFu? The point, I and many others are making, is that athletics would still be offered by the former FBS schools that may have to move down a notch and would have minimal impact on the other programs. There would be no impact at the D-II or III level.

VOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 07:15 PM
  #282
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
Perhaps a few FBS schools would have a problem paying but not the majority.
Right. Because the BCS conferences are half of FBS. No one is worried about those schools. They have the money. That's what I've been trying to tell you the entire GD thread: BCS has money. FBS schools have less. FCS schools even less. Non-football schools have little. It's the FCS/non-football schools who can't afford to pay their players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
Forget the FCS schools because according to you, they are irrelevant in the sporting world...so they would be minimally impacted by the creation of a new FBS that pays its players.
You don't understand.

The media doesn't consider them relevant because the media pays the BCS Conferences billions and has no financial interest in the other leagues.

I'm saying that the more the FCS and non-football schools have to spend to keep up with BCS football schools (in the other sports), the less relevant they become. It takes money to have a program recruits want to come to. They'd lose recruiting ground.

Gonzaga basketball went from being a nobody to a 15-time Tourney team and #1 in the country. Because their NCAA wins gave them cash payouts; because ESPN gave their conference a TV deal; the rest of the WCC used "We're on TV" to out-recruit other small schools, now the WCC is a two-bid league. Gonzaga opened a new arena with their money, now their women's basketball and volleyball teams use that facility to recruit with and have made a giant leap forward. Their baseball team is suddenly good. The WCC is getting more NCAA bids in EVERY SPORT than before they had the TV deal.


So what happens if they have to pay players?

If it's a flat-fee to players ($2000), then in MEN'S HOOPS, #12 (final poll) Gonzaga can probably keep up with the BCS schools better than #19 New Mexico can. UNM would have to pay 98 players and Gonzaga 13.

If it's a percentage of TV revenue to players, Gonzaga is screwed.

Let's say the players win in court the right to 10% of their schools TV revenue to divide among the MBB/FB players (equal share per player).
Gonzaga (10 percent of $400,000; divided by 13) can give its men's basketball players $3,077 each.
EACH BIG TEN SCHOOL (10 percent of $27 million each; divided by 98) can its men's basketball players $27,551 each.

Recruits now are picking Gonzaga over Pac-12 schools because Gonzaga wins and Washington and Oregon State don't. When UW and OSU can offer Gonzaga's recruiting targets eight times the cash, Gonzaga isn't going to win much longer.

In every sport, the TV money has consolidated the power and the ability to win. It's a trickle-down effect for the smaller sports.

Schools like Louisiana Tech, Old Dominion, Sam Houston State, Hawaii, Long Beach State, UC Santa Barbara were all women's basketball powers. Hawaii, Long Beach State, Pacific, Utah State, and Portland State were volleyball powers.

But as tons of TV money entered the BCS conferences, they started spending more on other sports, so they dominate the small schools who can't spend as much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
What makes you think a new division schools of only FBS participants would want to freeze out a Gonzaga in basketball....would not happen..
What makes a "new division of only FBS participants" freeze out Gonzaga? Gonzaga doesn't have FBS football, so they wouldn't be allowed to be a participant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
The point, I and many others are making, is that athletics would still be offered by the former FBS schools that may have to move down a notch and would have minimal impact on the other programs. There would be no impact at the D-II or III level.
My interest is that I love college sports. That I went to a non-football school, did grad school at a (non-BCS) FBS school, and am at another non-football school now. I know the student-athletes. I know what they get for free and know they appreciate all of it. And I know they all want to compete in the highest classification of their sport.

You're saying "Athletics would still be offered" but it's not simply playing any game in their sport that matters. They can play rec league sports to enjoy the sport. What's special is playing DIVISION I athletics.

If you ask the kids what their favorite game to play was, they aren't going to say the time they beat a D-II school by 40 even though it was their biggest margin of victory. They're going to say it was the time they played the #1 team in the country in their home arena and instead of 500 fans they was a sold out crowd of 7000 people, they were on SportsCenter, and a legendary coach complimented them by name in an AP story more than the exact score, which was heavily in #1's favor.
Or in one of their multiple wins vs BCS teams; like being up 15 before halftime, and one of the BCS players said "Who ARE you guys? You're not supposed to be doing this to US!"
Or winning a conference title and getting a championship ring. Which the conference can only guarantee they get because the conference uses their check from the NCAA (out of that CBS contract every year) to pay for 'em. None of those things happen if they're not in the same Division anymore.

My "point" is that you're simply wrong about the "minimal impact" because you have no idea what it's like being in a non-FBS athletic department.

You think that taking those good experiences from kids at 80% of Division I, so that 1% of the D-I athletes GET PAID to have those experiences is a GOOD IDEA. Even if it's logically correct (it isn't), it's morally reprehensible.

Survival of the fittest is fun when you're sitting in the stands rooting for the Lions to devour the Christians. Climb down into the arena and see how minimal the Lion's impact is on you.


Last edited by KevFu: 07-12-2013 at 07:23 PM.
KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 07:57 PM
  #283
VOB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,566
vCash: 500
KevFu you are under the mistaken assumption that allowing NCAA players to share in some of the revenue they generate would create a free for all system where schools such as Michigan and Texas will be offering multi-million dollar contracts. As if that would really happen! What we are talking about here is allowing players to receive some of the revenues generated, not all of the revenues, not 1/2 the revenue or maybe not even 10% but enough that they can have their entire education paid for and some left over while receiving a share in licensed apparel after graduation.

Yes some schools would more attractive when you consider licensing fees....but guess what, those schools are more attractive today anyway.

VOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 08:27 PM
  #284
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
KevFu you are under the mistaken assumption that allowing NCAA players to share in some of the revenue they generate would create a free for all system where schools such as Michigan and Texas will be offering multi-million dollar contracts. As if that would really happen! What we are talking about here is allowing players to receive some of the revenues generated, not all of the revenues, not 1/2 the revenue or maybe not even 10% but enough that they can have their entire education paid for and some left over while receiving a share in licensed apparel after graduation.

Yes some schools would more attractive when you consider licensing fees....but guess what, those schools are more attractive today anyway.
It's not a mistaken assumption, it's an assumption. I concede it could become a mistaken one, but we don't know until this O'Bannon case plays out. We also have NO IDEA what the court will decide.

Think about an arbitration hearing for sports contracts: The arbiter hears both arguments for what the player is worth, and decides what the salary should be. People like you and I can play the game at home, discussing what that an NHL player is worth based on our knowledge of the rest of the league. But what makes anyone sure the JUDGE knows the rest of the league, or is even a hockey fan? (Check out the PHX Bankruptcy threads for some hilarious courtroom ignorance of hockey). When arbitration started in baseball, a judge rewarded a relief pitcher a huge contract and THEN asked the team's manager "what the hell is a save?"

If the judge doesn't understand the implications for ALL of athletics, his decision could easily be catastrophic for the rest of Division I.

The plaintiffs played sports at UCLA, Nebraska, and Cincinnati. What do you think their lawyers are going to describe?
The only small school guy is Bill Russell, who played in the 50s before TV money entered the picture.

The NCAA is going to look like money grubbing plantation owners, for the exact same reason you don't believe my arguments in this thread: BCS schools playing basketball and football games in huge stadiums and arenas in front of tons of paying customers with advertising and sponsors is what is on TV. TV talks about the star players on the BCS teams who go on to the NFL and get rich.

The walk ons, the FCS schools, the non-revenue sports, and the Graduation ceremonies of student athletes, aren't on ESPN, CBS and FOX.

The Plantiffs have to convince the court that what they see on TV is all that happens.
The defendant has to convince the court that everything it can't see actually happens.

You could win that case by pointing at the defendents and saying "$9 billion dollars" pointing to O'Bannon and saying "zero dollars" and let everyone get bored while the NCAA tries to explain that zero dollars doesn't mean there wasn't compensation.



I didn't describe a system where Michigan and Texas could offer whatever they wanted to the players. I said "if the court awards a percentage-based settlement that CAN be given to players, Gonzaga would be screwed."

The TV money differences are so out of whack that the BCS paying 7.5 times as many players the same percentage as Gonzaga can offer 8 times as much money to each, because the Big Ten and SEC have over 60x the TV money.

Like I said, flat-fee, it's the FCS/non-BCS schools who are hurt. Percentage, it's everyone but the BCS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB View Post
"enough that they can have their entire education paid for and some left over while receiving a share in licensed apparel after graduation"
(they do have their education paid for NOW). A share of licensing is something I've stated many times in this thread that I AM IN FAVOR OF.

EA Sports licensing fees? The players should get a cut AND a free copy of the game.

It's the likeness of the players going into the game. That's the morally right thing to do.

But it also is fair to ALL the players and schools.

EA Sports pays one fee to the NCAA for licensing rights and puts ALL the FBS schools and FBS players into the game.
If EA Sports had to buy the rights from each school, or each conference, that would be a morally corrupt thing to do.

The contract the athletes sign that gives the NCAA the right to their likeness needs to STAY with the NCAA. It just needs to be modified that they're compensated for it. From the NCAA. Not from schools. Not based on a player's free market worth, but as an equal member of a hypothetical student-athlete union.


Last edited by KevFu: 07-12-2013 at 09:00 PM.
KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 11:40 PM
  #285
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,322
vCash: 500
Keep D1 and DBCS both eligigle for basketball, and give the current FCS/FBS a 5 year warning a 64 team new football league is being formed I say. Allow schools to still value their d1 commitments while wanting more in football.

What would really be so bad about that?

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 11:43 PM
  #286
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
Keep D1 and DBCS both eligigle for basketball, and give the current FCS/FBS a 5 year warning a 64 team new football league is being formed I say. Allow schools to still value their d1 commitments while wanting more in football.

What would really be so bad about that?
How is that really different than what they have right now? That's just taking FBS and kicking out C-USA, MAC, MWC, Sun Belt, Army, Navy, and BYU.


This is all completely backwards. You don't solve the problems that only exist among/because of the rich by enabling them to have even more financial advantage over everyone else. All the issues you guys pointed out are BCS problems. Issues exist outsides of the BCS conferences, but most of them are from trying to keep pace with the BCS schools and their exploding revenue streams.


Last edited by KevFu: 07-12-2013 at 11:48 PM.
KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2013, 11:30 AM
  #287
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
How is that really different than what they have right now? That's just taking FBS and kicking out C-USA, MAC, MWC, Sun Belt, Army, Navy, and BYU.


This is all completely backwards. You don't solve the problems that only exist among/because of the rich by enabling them to have even more financial advantage over everyone else. All the issues you guys pointed out are BCS problems. Issues exist outsides of the BCS conferences, but most of them are from trying to keep pace with the BCS schools and their exploding revenue streams.
Well it sounds like the NCAA for 15 years has never been able toc reate a framework that works for the schools where football is a major business. About 50-60 schools have outgrown D1 rules when it comes to football. I don't think the NCAA is progressive enough to figure out something that works for them.

Someone has to be at the top, and someone has to be at the bottom. It's the way of life.

My proposal would also not automatically kick out all non-BCS teams. It would simply be creating a seperate division under the NCAA that allows it to be tax-free still while allowing for stipend for schools that want to join it. The BCS conferences get in, and any other schools that want to accept the stipend requirement, say a division made up of the likes Boise, BYU, Fresno, etc.

What is really so bad about that? We all get to watch the same teams without all the secret payment ******** we hate.

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2013, 12:43 PM
  #288
Brodie
Moderator
King at the Wall
 
Brodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 11,827
vCash: 500
I'm shocked nobody's mentioned a pro/rel approach yet

Brodie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2013, 06:58 PM
  #289
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
Well it sounds like the NCAA for 15 years has never been able toc reate a framework that works for the schools where football is a major business. About 50-60 schools have outgrown D1 rules when it comes to football. I don't think the NCAA is progressive enough to figure out something that works for them.

Someone has to be at the top, and someone has to be at the bottom. It's the way of life.
This is why we have an argument in this thread in the first place. The BCS schools have outgrown the rest of Division I… not the RULES. They've outgrown it financially. All the rules are fine. Someone has to be at the top and the bottom, but that doesn't mean the difference between the two should be 800x the revenue between first and last.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
My proposal would also not automatically kick out all non-BCS teams. It would simply be creating a seperate division under the NCAA that allows it to be tax-free still while allowing for stipend for schools that want to join it. The BCS conferences get in, and any other schools that want to accept the stipend requirement, say a division made up of the likes Boise, BYU, Fresno, etc.

What is really so bad about that? We all get to watch the same teams without all the secret payment ******** we hate.
Ok, there's about seven things wrong with this.
#1 - You've capped the number at 64 schools. Which means 59+ current FBS schools ain't making the cut. Not "automatically" kicking them out. Just kicking them out.

#2 - The "in five-years" thing isn't a factor. Moving between classes of FCS/FBS or from D-II to D-I is a four-year process anyway. Conference realignment is even 1-2 years out. (Navy announced in 2012 that they are joining the American - aka old football side of Big East - in 2015).

#3 - You're creating a structure where the difference between classes is HOW MUCH YOU SPEND. That's fine for pro sports, because sports leagues are groups of businesses. The Coyotes can't afford the minimum, so they get revenue sharing.

#4 - We don't have that structure now with D-I, D-II, D-III: The requirements for D-I is "use the facilities you have in D-II to educate more students because more kids can play sport in those facilities." It costs $600,000 in scholarship minimums to go from D-II to D-I. We're talking about $5.5 million in scholarships alone to go D-I (no football) to D-I (FBS football).

#5 - You're adding about 4-to-20 times the expenses to schools, so they can issue a mandate that the schools "educate 85 more student-athletes." Sounds nobel like in #4. Except that for the price of football, you could probably educate 300 athletes in other sports and those 300 will be MORE LIKELY TO GRADUATE, since football is DMFL in grad rates.

#6 - All of those things add up to the NCAA saying to the world: "big time football is more important than anything else in college" and if you don't understand why that's bad, go look up why Penn State almost got the death penalty last year.

#7 - The idea that paying players a stipend somehow PREVENTS "secret payment ********" is so ridiculous, even those in the media in favor of paying players admit that's absurd.

There's not "secret payment ********" going on between BCS SCHOOLS and athletes. It's all BOOSTERS trying to be big shots with the kids (hoping they get something back when the kids go pro).



Giving the players a stipend doesn't do a damned thing to prevent boosters from sliding gifts to players. It makes it harder for anyone to notice they got gifts in the first place.


SMU's Scandal was when the NCAA controlled TV rights and there were two TV games a week. You had to be good to get on TV and promote your university and make money. Now Vanderbilt and LSU get the same paycheck from TV money and every single game for them is on TV. The TV money lets the BCS schools dominate the non-BCS Schools. Which makes 80% of them .500 or better, eligible for bowls, their stadiums full and their boosters happy.

The only thing that makes their boosters mad and leaves unsold tickets is if they have a bowl ban or the death penalty. So, doing the only thing that gets you the death penalty is NOT in their best interest.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brodie View Post
I'm shocked nobody's mentioned a pro/rel approach yet
Conferences make it impossible. It would be playing Russian Roulette with your TV revenue.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:02 PM
  #290
Concordski
Knockoff Jets FTW
 
Concordski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 663
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/...ph89Y.facebook

And NCAA has discontinued their Video Games. NCAA Football 14 will be the last.

Concordski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:04 PM
  #291
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,322
vCash: 500
****!! And just before playoffs too. I really wish the playoffs could have been put in or patched in....

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:06 PM
  #292
Concordski
Knockoff Jets FTW
 
Concordski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
****!! And just before playoffs too. I really wish the playoffs could have been put in or patched in....
It was the only logical conclusion and I can't say I'm mad, I liked these games but I suspect it's better for everyone.

Concordski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:06 PM
  #293
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brodie View Post
I'm shocked nobody's mentioned a pro/rel approach yet
In a fantasy world, it would work so amazingly well to sort out the best teams really.

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:09 PM
  #294
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 21,245
vCash: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concordski View Post
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/...ph89Y.facebook

And NCAA has discontinued their Video Games. NCAA Football 14 will be the last.
Here's to EA's next sports vehicle, College Football 2015, featuring the likes of the Texas Cows, Michigan Athenians, and Oregon Mallards!

Third time I've made that joke on these boards, all with different non-copyright infringing replacement names, btw.

No Fun Shogun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:17 PM
  #295
Concordski
Knockoff Jets FTW
 
Concordski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Here's to EA's next sports vehicle, College Football 2015, featuring the likes of the Texas Cows, Michigan Athenians, and Oregon Mallards!

Third time I've made that joke on these boards, all with different non-copyright infringing replacement names, btw.
LOL @ Athenians. College Football 2015 would be good if it had storylines attached about corruption in college football. They can do that now right?

Concordski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:17 PM
  #296
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 17,411
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Here's to EA's next sports vehicle, College Football 2015, featuring the likes of the Texas Cows, Michigan Athenians, and Oregon Mallards!

Third time I've made that joke on these boards, all with different non-copyright infringing replacement names, btw.
According to that, it still seems like they can make a College Football 2015 with as many individual schools that agree to license it.

IU Hawks fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:19 PM
  #297
Concordski
Knockoff Jets FTW
 
Concordski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan View Post
According to that, it still seems like they can make a College Football 2015 with as many individual schools that agree to license it.
It's not going to happen, because the precedent in the O'Bannon case would require the individual schools to compensate their players or else they'd go to court again.

Concordski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:20 PM
  #298
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 21,245
vCash: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concordski View Post
LOL @ Athenians. College Football 2015 would be good if it had storylines attached about corruption in college football. They can do that now right?
Introducing College Football 15's newest gameplay mode: Booster Mode! Recruit bluechip high schoolers with a few hundred dollars under the table, having them taken to a sorority mixer, giving them the keys to a new Corvette, and even letting them put jelly on their toast during a campus visit! Can you help your school win a championship only to have it taken away three years later after all the players and coaches involved are in the NFL?

No Fun Shogun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:28 PM
  #299
Concordski
Knockoff Jets FTW
 
Concordski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Introducing College Football 15's newest gameplay mode: Booster Mode! Recruit bluechip high schoolers with a few hundred dollars under the table, having them taken to a sorority mixer, giving them the keys to a new Corvette, and even letting them put jelly on their toast during a campus visit! Can you help your school win a championship only to have it taken away three years later after all the players and coaches involved are in the NFL?
Are classic teams allowed? I want to play as the 1905 Michigan team and recruit ringers in order to beat 1905 Chicago's team of ringers.

Concordski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 02:31 PM
  #300
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concordski View Post
Are classic teams allowed? I want to play as the 1905 Michigan team and recruit ringers in order to beat 1905 Chicago's team of ringers.
Separate dynasty mode for SMU alone! Start at the beginning of the scandal and rebuild!

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:11 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.