BREAKING 2020 Pac-12 football schedule

[ALA2262]

2020 Pac-12 football schedule: 10 conference games only starting Sept. 26
By Brian Wilmer - July 31, 2020

Photo: Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports


The 2020 Pac-12 football schedule has gained two conference games and dropped all non-conference opponents due to the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, according to an announcement by the league on Friday.

2020 Pac-12 football schedule: 10 conference games only starting Sept. 26

The 2020 Pac-12 football schedule has been modified to include 10 conference games only, according to an announcement by the league on Friday.

fbschedules.com

 

[B1GTide]

Most important takeaways from the Pac-12 football players' letter

The Pac-12 players' letter addressing player safety and social issues underscores how student-athletes are finding their voice.

www.espn.com

 

[lowend]

Give the players what they want: classify them as employees with free or discounted tuition, pay them, collect W9's, and start cutting taxes, FICA, a 401-K, etc. Make them punch in and out, make attending study hall a condition of employment, etc. Universities that can't support that can drop to DIII or club teams.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Give the players what they want: classify them as employees with free or discounted tuition,
pay them, collect W9's, and start cutting taxes, FICA, a 401-K, etc. Make them punch in and out, make attending study hall a condition of employment, etc. Universities that can't support that can drop to DIII or club teams.

Given:
1) how many schools have learned they can function online only
2) only 20 schools make a profit on football
3) Title IX (what a beaut!) is going to prevent you from paying football players and not everyone else
4) almost every other sport is non-profitable (with obvious rare exceptions like Duke b-ball)

Tell them to go to hell, and here's the number to the military recruiter.

I'm serious.

 

[smith5753]

This feels like something that can / will destroy college football.

 

[KrAzY3]

Tell them to go to hell, and here's the number to the military recruiter.

I'm serious.

I've seen this building for a while, and now is just the time for people to make their move. There's been a massive misinformation campaign being waged for years, which completely misleads a lot of these athletes into thinking they are part of a something profitable when in many cases they are not. It's kind of like WNBA athletes complaining about pay, and not taking into account their pay is already in fact basically charitable donations. The WNBA loses 10 million a year...

Here's a key demand from these players:
" for the league to distribute 50% of each sport's total conference revenue evenly among athletes in their respective sports. "

Now, almost every single athletic department in the country is not-profitable! I can not emphasize this enough. What makes up the gap? The school, the state legislator, they are getting funds from external sources simply to keep spending at the rates they are currently spending! It's completely nonsensical. Most athletes in most sports are already being donated piles of money to keep their sports going. From boosters, from the government, from the school. Now they're like wait, that's not enough, give me more? Give me half of all revenue? Half of what literally keeps the lights on?

I could go over the economics of this, but it's insane and shows a complete lack of understanding of the economics of the situation. That or they just want to destroy college sports...

 

[Padreruf]

I've seen this building for a while, and now is just the time for people to make their move. There's been a massive misinformation campaign being waged for years, which completely misleads a lot of these athletes into thinking they are part of a something profitable when in many cases they are not. It's kind of like WNBA athletes complaining about pay, and not taking into account their pay is already in fact basically charitable donations. The WNBA loses 10 million a year...

Here's a key demand from these players:
" for the league to distribute 50% of each sport's total conference revenue evenly among athletes in their respective sports. "

Now, almost every single athletic department in the country is not-profitable! I can not emphasize this enough. What makes up the gap? The school, the state legislator, they are getting funds from external sources simply to keep spending at the rates they are currently spending! It's completely nonsensical. Most athletes in most sports are already being donated piles of money to keep their sports going. From boosters, from the government, from the school. Now they're like wait, that's not enough, give me more? Give me half of all revenue? Half of what literally keeps the lights on?

I could go over the economics of this, but it's insane and shows a complete lack of understanding of the economics of the situation. That or they just want to destroy college sports...

You are completely on target...as one who had 2 sons play non-revenue producing collegiate sports, I laughed out loud when I read that. Half of what golf brings in? Even the contracts with the golf and apparel companies are mostly for equipment or clothing; minimal direct money involved and that usually goes to supplement the small (relative) salaries of coaches.
These young people are only looking at CFB, and only at the top schools and extrapolating that down. They are getting ready to have the education of a lifetime...and that's not a bad thing.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

This feels like something that can / will destroy college football.

It absolutely will.

RECIPE
1) Start with know-it-all college kids (and yes, I was one of them so I'm hardly judging them)
2) Combine the results of the O'Bannon lawsuit
3) Mix in the reality that athletes ARE exploited for financial gain even at schools (they're right about that)
4) Remember that Title IX, which was intended to be an opportunity is simultaneously a proverbial straitjacket
5) Mix in social media giving people the delusion that what they have to say is important and world-changing
6) Combine years of lying about things like CTE from the highly profitable NFL
7) Two scoops of basketball scandal
8) mix in a media that refuses to actually do its job and point out WHY Megan Rapinoe and the women's team make substantially less than the men's team [as I told one of these idiots - do you actually believe the best WNBA player (and I don't even know who that is) should make LeBron James money?]. Instead, this media picks a side and frames it's economic story as an issue of civil rights because they're full of what you can find in the barnyard
9) fewer parents willing to risk the CTE injury in hopes of an NFL career

And on top of all that rolling downhill....add in other things:
1) the refusal of the NFL to finance this as a sort of "minor league farm system" like baseball
2) A pandemic severe enough to shut down the entire country.

College football WILL die from all this eventually.

Go watch some old late 80s or early 90s college games on You Tube. Count how many hits on those games nowadays would result in either penalties or ejections (or both). It's unbelievable how brutal the sport was even though we naively thought it safe.

Remember, folks - in 2004, NASCAR (three years post-Earnhardt death) was so big they were in negotiations to set up racing in foreign countries as part of the normal schedule. Within four years, the sport was in what appears to be an irreversible decline (although I'm sure banning Confederate flags will actually make fans start coming back to races again and make the sport #1 in the country).

ANY sport can die - and it seems people don't know that. Once upon a time in the late 70s, jai alai (look it up) was gonna replace baseball as America's national pastime. Nobody young even knows about this unless they research sports. Baseball - back in the 50s to the mid-60s - was what football is NOW.....and then they bored the pants off fans with a deluge of 1-0 games when they raised the mound in 1963.

You're a sport - you're not oxygen or water or heat.

You're a luxury, not a necessity.

 

[B1GTide]

I pretty much support every ask up to the percentage of revenue. I can see asking for a percentage of profits, and most schools lose money so that means a percentage of nothing, but a percentage of revenue is a non-starter and they know it. It was probably included only so they could agree to remove it from their list of demands, giving the PAC a "win".

 

[KrAzY3]

I pretty much support every ask up to the percentage of revenue.

I don't, and I think some other demands are basically born of a sense of entitlement. They are literally asking for funds to be used on them and made available that they played no meaningful part in generating!

" End lavish facility expenditures and use some endowment funds to preserve all sports.* "
This is under "Protect All Sports", while the revenue ask is under "Economic Freedom and Equality". They cited the Stanford endowment and endowments are something I've not only looked at from time to time but cited here now and then. The thing is there is no correlation to success in sports and the size of the endowments! They are saying spend the endowments on athletes, but the athletes clearly are not the reason the endowments are so big!

For example, the largest endowments are Harvard, Stanford, then Yale. Not exactly sports powerhouses, although Stanford is good at some lesser sports. The top 10 list also includes Princeton and MIT. MIT is like Division 3 or something. The top endowment among SEC programs? Texas A&M, not exactly the top SEC athletic department. So when they say give us this money, they're just asking for a handout. I would also add that Alabama has a much smaller endowment (even if they completely drained it, it would only keep Alabama athletics afloat for the relatively short future), so if athletic departments are in fact funded by endowments then Alabama would be priced out of the market fairly quickly.

I could go on nitpicking their demands, but instead I'll just try to illustrate how misinformed they are via a former Alabama gymnast. I won't get into the other issue, which is why I happened upon her social media page, but I'll just cite a couple complaints she made.

In one post she complained that predominantly white schools were taking advantage of black athletes. In another, she complained that historically black universities didn't have gymnastics (inferring that if they did she'd have attended one). The thing she seemed to completely miss, that a lot of athletes here seem to be completely missing, is that rather than take advantage of her, Alabama gymnastics was in fact spending more money they it was generating on her and other gymnasts! They were giving her things well beyond the revenue generated! This is why there are no HBCU's with gymnastics, because it loses money! This is lost on so many people who are being brainwashed basically into believing they are being victimized, when in many cases it's quite the other way around.

 

[B1GTide]

I don't

Fine with me. You have the right to be wrong.

 

[KrAzY3]

Fine with me. You have the right to be wrong.

While noting the lighthearted nature of your reply, I would like to see the argument for opening up endowment funds to these athletes. I'm not saying they are wrong about everything, but they have done nothing to warrant such entitlement.

 

[B1GTide]

While noting the lighthearted nature of your reply, I would like to see the argument for opening up endowment funds to these athletes. I'm not saying they are wrong about everything, but they have done nothing to warrant such entitlement.

Read the whole thing. They are right about a whole lot more than they are wrong: #WeAreUnited

As for the endowment piece - no matter how any of us feels about this, it is not a legal option. That money is strictly earmarked, and those earmarks are protected by state and federal law. They can ask for it, and emotionally hope to see that change, but it can't/won't and it shouldn't because the money was donated for specific purposes, and the donations have to be used for those purposes.

 

[CrimsonProf]

Y'all help me out - have there been any real studies on how to pay players? I don't mean theoretical - I mean studies on how existing revenues will be used to pay players and what will happen when revenues are redirected away from existing commitments?

 

[B1GTide]

Y'all help me out - have there been any real studies on how to pay players? I don't mean theoretical - I mean studies on how existing revenues will be used to pay players and what will happen when revenues are redirected away from existing commitments?

Here is an article from 2011 with some interesting ideas: Paying College Athletes Would Cost $200 Million Each Year

 

[CrimsonProf]

Here is an article from 2011 with some interesting ideas: Paying College Athletes Would Cost $200 Million Each Year

Good read - but Lord knows that won't satisfy anyone. Feels like we're all grasping at straws right now.

 

[mrusso]

If any athlete, male, female, black, white, purple or whatever feels like they're being taken advantage of for the profitability of a university the solution is simple...don't play. No school is making you play the sport. You chose to play there. You're welcome to attend at your cost, or maybe get an academic scholarship. Join the military. Get a job straight out of high school. There are other choices and you absolutely do not have to contribute the bottom line of any college.

 

[B1GTide]

If any athlete, male, female, black, white, purple or whatever feels like they're being taken advantage of for the profitability of a university the solution is simple...don't play. No school is making you play the sport. You chose to play there. You're welcome to attend at your cost, or maybe get an academic scholarship. Join the military. Get a job straight out of high school. There are other choices and you absolutely do not have to contribute the bottom line of any college.

This is simply not an option for potential NFL players. They have to wait 3 years, and there is no other developmental league. College football is the NFL developmental league. IMO, the NFL should be forced to pick up these costs or drop the 3 year wait rule.

 

[KrAzY3]

it can't/won't and it shouldn't because the money was donated for specific purposes, and the donations have to be used for those purposes.

This we are in complete agreement on. I'm not sure everyone realizes this but a lot of donations to the athletic department actually count as revenue. They are specifically earmarked for the athletic department and the endowment is something else entirely.

 

[mrusso]

This is simply not an option for potential NFL players. They have to wait 3 years, and there is no other developmental league. College football is the NFL developmental league. IMO, the NFL should be forced to pick up these costs or drop the 3 year wait rule.

It absolutely is an option because no one is making them "tryout" for the NFL. If you want to go to the NFL and this is your only path, then pay your dues and spend your 3 or so years in college, and hopefully move on into the league. A lot of universities invest a lot of money in facilities, medical staff, coaching, etc, for an athlete to improve upon and showcase their talents. Yes, it's true that the athlete's talents helped that university, but the opposite is also true.

There are lots of talented, non-athletic students out there that must pay their own way, via savings, parents, student loans, etc. Thanks to what the university provided, a lot of them go on to successful careers. And it cannot be said that these students brought nothing to the university. Take away the non-athletes from any university and let's see how long it lasts.