• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

What's so good about moving up?

Successful and intelligent people usually don't take big, unnecessary, expensive, etc. risks, especially when dealing with an organization like a public college. They take measured risks that have been studied, are well-thought out, and have adequate financing. I don't see UM and certainly not the Board of Regents taking this risk, at least anytime soon. Montana is right where it should be and where it can afford to be. The landscape of college football continues to change and evolve. UM has been following that closely for a few decades. And also getting their physical house in order.

Your last sentence is not what I said. I said I know some big Griz supporters and boosters who don't support moving up. However, I have not discussed this subject with some/many of them in the past few years.
I agree with everything you said. As for your last point - I don't get how that is demonstrably different from what I said. If there is nuance, I guess it flew right over my head! :)
 
Sincerely an honest question here: Why would they do that?
I think it is because it is what they have always been doing and it is human nature to resist change more so than anything else. I would like to see a G6 playoff but it doesn’t seem realistic because most G6 schools don’t want it.
 
I think it is because it is what they have always been doing and it is human nature to resist change more so than anything else. I would like to see a G6 playoff but it doesn’t seem realistic because most G6 schools don’t want it.
It's "what they always did" because in those days, the ncaa controlled all of the money. Do you reasonably believe that the presidents at the G6 universities look at the money from the FBS playoffs and the ncaa BB tournament and don't think, "Hey, that looks like an idea we could implement where we could rake in a lot more bucks than we do playing the Poulon Bowl in Santa Fe"?
 
I agree with everything you said. As for your last point - I don't get how that is demonstrably different from what I said. If there is nuance, I guess it flew right over my head! :)
You said: "It is telling that you know many incredibly successful people who would advise against moving up." I didn't say I knew "many" "incredibly successful" people. And no one "advised" against moving up. And as I said above, this is what I was trying to say: "I said I know some big Griz supporters and boosters who don't support moving up. However, I have not discussed this subject with some/many of them in the past few years." No one "advised". But I know some posters who don't support moving up. That's all. One is probably incredibly successful, and he is a big Griz and Bobby fan, but I don't know what the others have. Enough to be good supporters, financial and otherwise. That's all. No big deal.
 
It's "what they always did" because in those days, the ncaa controlled all of the money. Do you reasonably believe that the presidents at the G6 universities look at the money from the FBS playoffs and the ncaa BB tournament and don't think, "Hey, that looks like an idea we could implement where we could rake in a lot more bucks than we do playing the Poulon Bowl in Santa Fe"?
I agree with you that playoffs especially with on campus games bring in more money. G6 athletic departments seem to not currently see it that way but it could change in the future. The key is finding a good broadcasting partner and media deal for the G6 tournament.
 
It's "what they always did" because in those days, the ncaa controlled all of the money. Do you reasonably believe that the presidents at the G6 universities look at the money from the FBS playoffs and the ncaa BB tournament and don't think, "Hey, that looks like an idea we could implement where we could rake in a lot more bucks than we do playing the Poulon Bowl in Santa Fe"?
I assume the NCAA hoops tourney would stay essentially together and the same as it is now. It's run by NCAA too. I agree with you on any left-behind class of G6. They would certainly look at playoffs, unless it just wasn't feasible and or there wasn't enough tv/media money in doing it. The Big Boys would have a bigger potential antitrust issue if they broke off, excluded the G6, and the G6 couldn't set up money-winning playoffs, is my reaction. I'll ask my in-the-know friend what he thinks generally.
 
I assume the NCAA hoops tourney would stay essentially together and the same as it is now. It's run by NCAA too. I agree with you on any left-behind class of G6. They would certainly look at playoffs, unless it just wasn't feasible and or there wasn't enough tv/media money in doing it. The Big Boys would have a bigger potential antitrust issue if they broke off, excluded the G6, and the G6 couldn't set up money-winning playoffs, is my reaction. I'll ask my in-the-know friend what he thinks generally.
What does money winning mean? Does the G6 playoff just need to be net positive or does the money they make have to be comparable to the CFP for antitrust law to not apply?
 
Quite honestly, your premise. Do you think having "good enough" really matters when it comes to getting left behind?

Ok that’s fair Helena. I’ll accept my post could have been worded better. To clarify - as we all know college football is big business and in my opinion, the Griz program only gets left behind if the university itself refuses to adapt and embrace change as college football evolves. Personally I don’t believe getting left behind is as big of a risk as some others do because UM football is a desirable product that can continue to grow its value in the college football marketplace.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top