Question is which school out of SMU, ASU or ND would have received the short end of the stick if Army had beaten ND…?
In my opinion losses to NIU and Army would’ve kept ND out…
Who knew the ACC was SO weak!! They’re not long for this world.
#GoCoogs!
SMU
1 Like
In that hypothetical, counter-factual, alternate reality…
ASU still gets a bid as the Big 12 champ. Maybe not a bye, but definitely a bid.
SMU’s rank might still get them in, though, much like Indiana, I’d consider them undeserving.
ND might drop in the rankings enough to knock them out of contention, ESPECIALLY when paired with their loss to a non-champ MAC school at home.
It’d be hard to keep a brand with as many fan eyeballs as ND out, but I’m guessing they’d be the odd man out.
But as I said…there was no chance in Hell that Army was going to beat ND (ND was significantly more physically talented at every position, and a lot deeper), so it’s more or less a question about nothing.
Yeah, Army lost by 35 at ND.
What if UTK had not beaten Florida in OT in Neyland?
There are lots of schools who can do what SMU is doing, but only SMU’s brand is enhanced by NIL football.
SMU is a very good school but it isn’t in the Rice, Stanford, Northwestern, Ivy League category. You go to SMU because of the money the students come from. Money is SMU’s brand. The contacts you make at SMU are second to none. So if Money is your brand buying a national championship football team is the perfect way to advertise it.
Stanford could do what SMU is doing but is Stanford’s brand enhanced by it? No but SMU’s is enhanced.
1 Like
They bought their way into a conference that didnt really want them and doesnt even have to pay them for 8 years!! There is nothing brilliant about it…They are super rich and spent the money to their advantage. Almost no other school could do something like that.
1 Like
Yes. Thank you.
Right… more brute force than brilliance…
and yet they almost won it
Sorry but if Clemson and FSU left tomorrow it would not make much difference. To be frank, neither school has the financial wherewithal to compete in an NIL/pay to play environment. I don’t know why people keep arguing with me and others about this. Numbers don’t lie. FSU has an endowment of $947M, which is less than ours. That was after a massive fundraising campaign. However we all know that endowments are restricted in their use; however, they do represent the overall financial wherewithal of an alumni base as well as the financial assets of a university. An endowment of that size suggests that when it comes to those items, FSU’s support is lacking. Its overall revenue was $170M, while its expenses were $172M. So it ran a deficit. It does have a $12M NIL budget, but I can’t tell if that is for all sports or just football.
Clemson generated only $123M in revenue, although it was smarter with its expenses ($117M). So it was actually profitable.
Clemson’s endowment is slightly larger than FSU’s ($994M). So again, smaller than UH.
I just think that people are focusing on stats that don’t really matter anymore. Oregon, SMU, and to a lesser extent, CU, have shown that NIL, Brand, and Vibes matter more than anything in today’s college athletics. Why? Because that is how you get players!! All three of those items revolve around money.
Texas, OSU, Penn State, Tenn, and UGA also have money, brand and vibes, so that is why they are benefitting from NIL. While Sen. Tuberville and Manchin tried to regulate it at a federal level, those states immediately passed laws which basically deregulated NIL in their states. So they now have an advantage and a head start over other states. Combine that with money and this is what you get.
Now I do think UH can compete, but we are going to have to really build up our football brand. Right now it is lacking big time. Basketball brand is fine, but football is in the toilet to be blunt.
1 Like
This topic is so tired and pointless because it assumes that SMU joined the ACC for money in the first place, which they didn’t
SMU doesn’t need TV money. They just want to be in a Power Conference again.
This was there way to do that
2 Likes
Do you actually believe the drivel and mistruths you put out ? Or is it just to put a bee in peoples bonnets? If that’s the case, i understand that because the board needs a little excitement.
But if you actually believe it then everything you say is suspect.
To say that a legacy admit to an Ivy League, and top public universities, are disrespected because they bought their way in through a parent having attended, is total hogwash.
And the same if you pivot and say that a parent making a financial donation makes their children disrespected at that institution. Hogwash.
1 Like
As I said, being a legacy doesn’t necessarily mean that your parents BOUGHT your way in. Not all legacies come from rich families, though I’ll allow that legacy admissions exist primarily as a way of securing donations from alums.
But imagine that a non-legacy got into the Ivy League purely because his rich parents secured his admission by giving the school millions, that is to say, they BOUGHT their kids’ way in.
Would you respect that guy as much as someone that got into the Ivy League…ON THEIR MERITS???
Of course not. I sure as Hell wouldn’t, and I am hardly being disingenuous about that. I suspect that most “cool” people would feel the same.
That’s how I view SMU in this case. SMU should NOT be regarded as highly as other schools that were invited to join “power” conference because others were legitimately big enough brands to deserve it and added value. On the contrary, SMU was added because they bought their way in and were essential to the ACC’s mere survival, as FSU CORRECTLY stated in their lawsuit.
Sorry…but no respect for that.
Yeah I mean I wouldn’t go as far as how he framed it, but I think unless you’re in those circles, then theres generally a not so favorable opinion of those types of people.
With that said, it’s those types of people that are able to cover the costs of tuition for the lower income kids that attend Ivy League schools via financial aid. If Harvard really wants a bright kid from a non-wealthy background, they will go out of their way to get them into Harvard because it makes Harvard look good.
It’s a two-way street of ugly, because where Ivy Leagues really struggle with are the middle class. Generally, unless you’re a poor kid with high intelligence of achievement (which is rare within itself), then chances are you are at the very minimum, upper-middle class to attend Ivy League schools
We will not be able to match SMU in NIL money and that will always be the determining factor.
Sad as it is to say, you are probably correct.
UNLESS Tilman Fertitta or some other big “sugar daddy” a la Phil Knight steps up for UH.
OTOH…we are better equipped to benefit from the transfer portal than most other schools.
Perhaps that’s an equalizer.
UH has a bunch of alums in high places…we are literally in rich positions of power everywhere
2 Likes
Wake me up when enough of them BOTH a) care enough about UH sports, AND b) have the resources of a Phil Knight or SMU oil baron to the point where they will fund our NIL honeypot comparably to Oregon or SMU.
I suspect I’ll be taking a VERY long nap.
I know this for a fact. Ivy schools will cover full cost of your attendance (not just tuition) if your family makes 100k or less. You’re likely to get some form of financial aid if your family makes less than 300k. Anything above that, well you might be on your own.
It’s unfair to the middle class, because of the cost of schooling vs your income. Princeton, for instance, has 85% getting some form of FA. The other 15%, to your point, probably does subsidize.
That said, these kids are not stupid. Their families just happen to make more. The kids work incredibly hard and are probably more tortured to perform than the so-called non-privileged kids. It’s infuriating to hear this argument (from some people) that if you had some means, you are a substandard idiot who will just coast (and bought your way in). On the contrary. these kids generally are the most worked and most exhausted.