Quantcast
Sports

NCAA board hands 5 biggest conferences more power

Comments

Return To Article
  • Whatsnu Sandy, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:56 a.m.

    There's an old saying, be careful what you wish for.

    The P5s will now have the power to pass the legislation they want to, but they'll also be responsible for the consequences.

    Paying athletes and increasing health insurance seems like a good idea, but that could open a whole can of worms for minor and women's sports.

    If every football player is paid an additional $2000 to cover college expenses, shouldn't every women's lacrosse player also be paid an additional $2000 to cover their college expenses?

    The athletic budgets of the majority of P5 teams, including Utah, already operate in the red, so where's the extra money going to come from?

  • CordonBleu Park City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:02 p.m.

    An extra $2000 to help cover educational expenses is doable; but what if the P5s vote to make that amount unlimited, allowing schools like Texas and Ohio St and Alabama and USC to literally out bid cash-strapped schools, like Utah, for players?

  • BlueCoug Orem, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:13 p.m.

    I like the idea of paying players enough so that they have a little "walking around" money to go to a movie, to go out to dinner, or simply not have to feel like a pauper, but this could easily get out of hand.

    It's unreasonable to assume that the NCAA will be able to restrict this only to athletes in revenue-producing sports. There are probably lawyers out their right now preparing to file lawsuits in behalf of men's minor sports and women athletes, and judges who would be more than willing to rule in their favor.

    Once this train has left the station its going to be impossible to stop it.

  • ekute Layton, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:18 p.m.

    I don't know. Where did the money come from before?

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:23 p.m.

    In other words the new Division I-A will consist of 65 teams and everyone else will be second class citizens.

  • BayAreaCougar Pleasanton, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:24 p.m.

    I think that Whatsnu has a point. Programs will be cut, maybe not football but because of Title IX you can't cut a women's team without having an impact on a men's team.

    Schools with deeper pockets will be able to fund more teams but what happens when there are only 5 golf teams in the NCAA? Sports like golf and tennis maybe the first casualties but there are many sports that will be cut that provide great educational opportunities for athletes that have nothing to do with football and basketball. Greed is a sin that hurts those around you and yourself. The P5 conferences need to keep their greed in check.

    As a BYU fan I know that the sponsoring institution has more money to put into athletics if push comes to shove then Utah and Utah State's sponsoring institution (the state of Utah). In the long run this could be the end of intercollegiate athletics in all but one school in Utah.

    Beware of the unintended consequences of your choices, and don't get greedy.

  • VegasUte Las Vegas, NV
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:24 p.m.

    I hope it comes from state funds so that byU fans will be paying for our football players' "walking around money"! That would be awesome!!

    Go Utes!!

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:36 p.m.

    This a huge!

    Huge in a positive way for the big boys

    And a huge blow to the irrelevant mid majors like Provo an Logan

    Add this to the espn article about big boy colleges moving towards only playing other big boys and the future of WAC teams likes byu and usu is very much in jeopardy

    It's a very good time to be with the big boys and a bad time to be outside!

    Byu is getting farther and farther away from relevancy by the day!

    I love my PAC 12 membership.

    Bye bye mid majors!

  • ekute Layton, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:37 p.m.

    CordonBleu,

    Luxury tax.

  • ekute Layton, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:39 p.m.

    "Once this train has left the station its going to be impossible to stop it."

    And it looks like byu missed it.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:40 p.m.

    This is a death sentence for any mid major that has dreams of ever being a big boy!

    The mid majors do not like this. But guess what?

    We do not care!

    I couldn't care less that this hurts byu and usu. in fact, this is a win win.

    This makes power concerns football a step forward and a huge step back for mid majors.

    And we love it! Goodbye byu and Wyoming and usu.

  • uteBusters Park City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:40 p.m.

    VegasUte

    "I hope it comes from state funds..."

    Don't count on it.

    The state has far more pressing needs than providing "walking around money" to a bunch of spoiled football players.

    If Utah can't afford to fund this out of athletic funds, their athletes will just have to become those left on the outside looking in, while schools that have learned to live within their budget, are able to afford "keeping up with the Joneses".

  • morpunkt Glendora, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:43 p.m.

    Let's be forthright about what's happening (and been happening) in the NCAA a for a long time now. Big cash rules. Now, the power brokers that be, have circumvented fairness in the overall bowl championship again.
    I believe that, in essence, college sports is already a pseudo professional entity that could go the way of what the Olympic athletes have gone, blatantly giving up the facade of amateurism and becoming officially professionals. Admit it people.

  • ekute Layton, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:43 p.m.

    BayAreaCougar,

    Don't worry, as a have-not, byu will still have women's golf and lacrosse.

  • scenic view Baltimore, MD
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:54 p.m.

    ekute / christy

    Actually, the true loser here is Utah, whose athletic budget is already in the red and will be hard-pressed to convince the state of Utah to increase funding so that it can be spent on something so frivolous as Utah trying to keep up with the big boys of college football.

  • WA_Alum&Dad Marysville, WA
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:55 p.m.

    "What starts as a movement eventually becomes a business, and ends up a racket." Sounds like the NCAA to me.

    I'm a big college football fan, and of college sports in general, and I don't see any way this is beneficial for broader collegiate athletics.

    If what you want your school's football program to be is a de-facto farm team for the NFL, then great. If all you care about is seeing "your team" on TV on Saturdays, wonderful. But that's not supposedly the charter of higher education. Make the NFL and the NBA establish a farm team system like Major League Baseball has, and give the "student-athletes" that are only in school for the chance of playing for money later have a way to get there without having to be warehoused at college while they hone their craft.

    Seriously--somebody explain to me how continuing to increase the disparity of money in collegiate sports is a net benefit?

  • Steven S Jarvis Orem, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:57 p.m.

    This is the worst possible news for fans of College football. Teams like the University of Utah cannot afford the increased costs that this will bring. The U may end up dropping the minor men sports and just enough women's sports to be compliant with Title IX.

    The U was not operating in the black for the last several years. With the increased costs of fielding football they will struggle even more against the big boys.

  • John S. Harvey Sandy, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 12:58 p.m.

    If this governance structure gets coupled with the P5 teams scheduling only other P5 teams then it will be interesting to see how long the Utah fans stay thrilled with being a "big boy" when their team racks up 2 or 3 win seasons decade after decade. Will being a P5 body bag really be that big of a thrill year after year after year after year . . . . .?

  • John Charity Spring Back Home in Davis County, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:00 p.m.

    The NCAA has just turned over the duty to the fox the duty of guarding the henhouse. There will be no rules, and chaos will reign.

    No system can last under this type of chaos. As Abraham Lincoln famously stated "Whenever the vicious portion of the population shall be permitted to gather in bands of hundreds and thousands, and burn churches, ravage and rob provision stores, throw printing presses into rivers, shoot editors, and hang and burn obnoxious persons at pleasure, and with impunity; depend on it, this government cannot last."

  • TroyTown Anaheim, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:02 p.m.

    christy

    What this is is the death knell to Utah's hopes of ever being able to crawl out of the PAC 12 basement.

    The Utes will never be able to win a bidding war with the big boys of the P5 conferences.

    Big money schools like USC, UCLA, Stanford and Oregon have cemented their status as the top dogs of the conference, leaving schools like Utah, Colorado and Washington State to fight for scraps at the bottom of the conference.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:02 p.m.

    So the NCAA is now effectively broken into two pieces. This will not end well. Things will unravel even more.

    I see lawsuits coming.

  • jmchess1 Kemah, TX
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:03 p.m.

    Will a non Big 5 conference Div I football team with no losses ever play for the national championship against a Big 5 team with 1 loss? I don't think so.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:07 p.m.

    65 teams will be part of the future of division I football.

    And we can be happy one and only one of them is in Utah!

    Mid majors: enjoy your new division II

    I am so happy!

  • No playoff for U Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:07 p.m.

    ekute

    Who's really the "have not" here?

    The school whose athletic department operates in the black and will be able to afford the added expense of paying players a little "walking around money".

    or

    The school whose athletic department already operates in the red and will be forced to beg the Utah legislature for more money? That expanded stadium that Utah fans were hoping for will be the first casualty.

  • Solomon Levi Alpine, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:18 p.m.

    Reality check Chris B

    The death sentence could be to University of Utah sports.

    Utah is headed over the fiscal cliff with a maintenance backlog that tops $400 million and an ever-increasing backlog of needed and costly deferred maintenance.

    If you can't even afford to repair your crumbling classrooms, how are you going to be able to justify paying football players "walking around money"?

  • BayAreaCougar Pleasanton, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:18 p.m.

    ekute,

    At some point it is likely that the PAC12 would fragment with the schools that can fiscally afford to compete (Stanford, USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington) not wanting to share there revenue with schools that can't fiscally compete. Utah is more likely to become a have not in this scenario then BYU.

    Utah State might have a better chance of surviving since they will know how to survive without the PAC12 money.

    When Utah has to compete on a "Pay for Play" world with larger purses pursuing players Utah will miss out on even more athletes.

    The cream of the P5 won't really care about the dregs of the P5 eventually. I would be foolish to believe that BYU would all the sudden have an advantage but since it does not have a Title IX obligation it can shift resources easier than other schools.

    If BYU and the LDS Church want football the compete, it will. I don't think that Utah will have a choice, in that scenario.

  • Bleed Crimson Sandy, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:27 p.m.

    Poor BYU!

  • Jared from CT SOUTHBURY, CT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:33 p.m.

    This is the bottom line: The "big" "power 5" schools are (a) greedy, and (b) afraid to lose their power and control to parity. So they are doing everything they can to keep all the money they can in their control, and to shut out schools that aren't already in their circle (even when many of the already-in schools are smaller or less competitive than outsider schools).

    Look at the NCAA tourney. A pretty level playing field. Every conference gets at least one team into the tourney. What happens? The "big boys" often get whupped on. And every year there is more parity, which means, drum roll... More revenue sharing! Waaaaaa....

    Here is the true solution to college football: A real playoff with 16 teams, one from each FBS conference, plus a few at-large. INSTANTLY the regular season's meaningfulness would skyrocket. Conference realignment would cease (after an initial reshuffling). And competitive balance and fairness would be established.

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:41 p.m.

    Not to worry folks. If you truly followed the sports news you would know that Utah AD Chris Hill has supported the "full cost of attendance" idea for a long time and for all athletes and he has never once suggested that the money would come from state funds.

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:42 p.m.

    This is terrible news for the amazing parity we've seen lately in college sports. We'll now see a handful of p5 teams all over major media outlets and the mid-major conferences will be left to negotiate local contracts with no hope of anything national.

    If ESPN doesn't renew the contract I think BYU should put football on BYUtv and go its own way.

  • Cougsndawgs West Point , UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:42 p.m.

    Chrissy:
    Schools that can afford the changes will make them and move forward. I know you want to live in myopic bliss thinking BYU is going away. Sorry to burst your crimson bubble but as others have already stated BYU is in a better fiscal situation than Utah. This legislation may actually hurt Utah more than BYU which I find hilarious given your obvious misunderstanding of the issues that were actually voted on by the NCAA. In many ways these changes may actually put BYU ahead of U. Utah is already in the red, and you're rejoicing about the fact they will now have to pay players stipends to remain competitive? Obviously someone didn't attend their economics 101 class.

  • royalblue Alpine, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:43 p.m.

    christy

    "65 teams will be part of the future of division I football."

    And where do you think Utah will end up on the list of 65 teams?

    Here's a clue.

    The Utes have never finished with a winning record in the PAC 12.

    Add three more P5 opponents to Utah's 9-game conference schedule, and the Utes are doomed to finishing below .500 with no bowl EVER.

    If I were you, I'd stop obsessing about how this will affect BYU, and start worrying about how devastating this could be to Utah's chances of ever be able to finish with a winning record again.

  • IRS Agent PROVO, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:45 p.m.

    "The emperor has no clothes." The P5 power gluttons have signed their own death certificate. While they are thinking they have created something grand, the castle is crumbling around them. How valid is a "national championship" when it comes from a field of 65 teams? Most likely, the teams without the resources to competitively bid for players services, will start to withdraw from those conferences. That will leave a group of about 30 teams. This will continue until just a handful of teams are left in the sandbox. The other 200+ teams will move on and create their own more rational and satisfying (equitable) system and be content with playing for the joy of fair competition, and crown their own champion. Considering the majority of the schools and the majority of the nations fans will be cheering for one of those schools, who do you think the people will recognize as "their champion"?

    I see the remaining schools banding together and voting out the handful of elitist pigs, and moving forward with a fair and equitable system. Autonomy to the masses!!!

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:47 p.m.

    @BayAreaCougar - you're spot on here. If college football fans think conference affiliations will remain static they're seriously mistaken. There is no way that things stay like this for the next 20 years. The haves will segregate themselves from those in the conferences not pulling their own weight or who can't afford to upgrade facilities or pay an ever-increasing stipend amount. It's spiraling out of control now and the NCAA has lost any control it ever held.

    @ChrisB - I'm glad you're pleased but this cannot and will not last. Conferences will realign and some schools will be left out of the mix. Imagine a huge conference like the PAC wanted a few years ago...take Texas over Utah and the like. Utah will be left out in the cold.

    I suppose all this will just push liability from the NCAA down to the conferences and universities, I have a hard time believing university Presidents will like the fallout.

  • Samwise Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:49 p.m.

    From another article on this subject, on ESPN:

    "Several presidents said Thursday that the full cost-of-attendance stipends, which could be worth between $2,000 and $5,000 per player, likely would be the first item taken up."

    "Other new rules the biggest conferences could enact include loosened restrictions involving contact between players and agents, letting players pursue outside paid career opportunities, and covering expenses for players' families to attend postseason games."

    Those are all things BYU can (and likely will) keep up with the so called "big boys" on. So, Chris B and other BYU haters. This will not leave BYU in the dust or anything close to it. I am not familiar enough with USU's financial situation to know if they will be able to keep up with the changing standards or not, but I certainly hope they can. It may, however, help BYU distance itself from most other so called non P5 teams, and in so doing help BYU prove that we do belong with the big boys. And do it all by themselves, not because the Pac 12 needs a 12th member so they can have a conference championship game, and they were turned down by Texas and Oklahoma.

  • Solomon Levi Alpine, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:50 p.m.

    Dutchman

    "Not to worry folks. If you truly followed the sports news you would know that Utah AD Chris Hill has supported the "full cost of attendance" idea for a long time and for all athletes and he has never once suggested that the money would come from state funds."

    So, if Utah's athletic department is already operating in the red, what hidden source of funds is he going to use?

    Or are you just spouting off without any clue about how Chris Hill is going to pay for this?

  • Atrix Vancouver, WA
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:54 p.m.

    @ Utah fans,

    You can't seriously believe this is a blow to BYU. BYU is a privately funded University with deeper pockets than any state school. It's the public schools that need to watch out. It's the same reason why private high schools have plenty of money to go around while public high schools are left to the scraps the state can scrounge up.

    Good luck convincing the tax payers of Utah to pay what the big schools/private schools can afford.

  • taylormade1 Springville, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:55 p.m.

    BYU naysayers are in for a big surprise in this day and age of equality in all things.Sit back and enjoy the ride because a major storm is a brewing in college athletics !

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:55 p.m.

    I don't think this is a bad thing. Just ignore christina's and other like minded utah "fans" irrational exuberance over this and look at it logically.

    First of all many of the things these so called p5 conferences want are good things, increasing the value of scholarships is a good thing, expanding healthcare for these athletes is a good thing, guarnteeing a 4 year scholarship is also a good thing. Unfortunately they had no chance of being accomplished with the current makeup of the NCAA because schools with less funding wouldn't do it.

    But there are schools outsied the p5 that are in better positions to cover those costs than some of the so called p5 schools, BYU is a good example, and for them this is either no big deal or else a positive. No one say's those other schools can't also make those changes it is just that the p5 schools can make the changes without having to fight with the other schools about doing it.

    But keep in mind there are plenty of p5 schools, most in fact, that are already in the red.....continued

  • Jeremy234 SLC, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 1:58 p.m.

    Utah will be fine, now that they have access to a split of PAC money. Schools like BYU, Boise and USU will never again be able to compete against them for recruits however. This also will not be a "bidding war" as the teams have a set amount that they can pay. Go Utes!

  • CougarSunDevil Phoenix, AZ
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:07 p.m.

    I love the ute fans celebrating this. Once the P5 gets rid of the mid-majors, then the Texas, Oklahoma, USC, Oregon, and Alabama's of the world get a hold of the money, they will be able to start outbidding the lower end P5. Then, Utah fans (like in 2004 and 2008) will cry about being left out, just like BYU and other institutions are complaining about now.

    My how far the Utah apple has fallen from the tree.

  • Solomon Levi Alpine, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:09 p.m.

    Jeremy234

    You obviously don't understand the economics at play here.

    There's a reason why BYU has had a 65,000 seat stadium for over 30 years, while Utah has never had the funds to expand their crackbox of a stadium.

    There's a reason why BYU's athletic depart operates in the black, while Utah's operates in the red.

    BYU has the resources to absorb the added expense of providing full cost of attendance stipends, increased health insurance, and guaranteeing 4-year scholarships; Utah does not.

  • Ltrain St. George, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:17 p.m.

    I can guarantee that the majority of fans in this state are BYU fans. We will not stand for our legislature to give money to the U so that they can pay their athletes. What needs to happen is someone needs to get wise and start cutting these sports that cannot support themselves. That means that everything but mens basketball and football becomes a "club sport." It makes me laugh that you Ute fans think that the people of Utah, and the LDS church, are going to keep losing money supporting the 11th best sports program in the PAC (we wish we would have got Texas and Oklahoma, but had to settle for utah and colorado instead)12

  • SoonerUte Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:17 p.m.

    Coungsdawgs, Duckhunter, probably others @ "as far as BYU in particular is concerned, well they can afford to do all of these things"

    BYU may be able to afford these things, but are they ALLOWED to do these things?

    The article says "The NCAA Board of Governors' voted to grant autonomy Thursday to the five biggest revenue-producing FBS conferences and Notre Dame"

    I don't see that BYU was granted autonomy.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:24 p.m.

    duck,

    Bronco today is quoted as saying byu will "try" to match whatever the big boys decide in terms of additional compensation and benefits to players.

    Kind of like how byu is "trying" to get into the big 12.

    How's all that "trying" going for you guys?

    LOL!

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:26 p.m.

    @sooner - the NCAA will die a quick death if they allow p5 schools to act differently from any other D-1 school. NCAA board probably said it like they did because the p5 and Notre Dame were the ones asking and pressing for it.

  • Kralon HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:28 p.m.

    This is such a great idea, we should also give more voting power to taxpayers who pay more in taxes . . . oh, wait, hmm, let me think about that . . .

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:29 p.m.

    @sooner - from an espn article: Leagues outside the Power Five can opt to adopt the same rules.

    Sounds like any other conference/team would just need to submit a proposal by Oct 1 just like the p5 conferences will.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:29 p.m.

    The only reason that Utah is near 0 profit margin is because of all the new buildings they're constructing (football and basketball facilities). They're getting double the revenue from the latter MWC years and with that extra money they're spending it on this stuff. If they had to account for paying student athletes a bit more they can adjust.

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:33 p.m.

    @schnee - amusing way you put that, your comment makes it sound like they're already paying their players!

  • 81Ute Central, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:41 p.m.

    'He who has the gold makes the rules' and the P5 know it. If this is shot down by the majority, then P5 will leave NCAA. The other conferences (schools) will have less then than they have now.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:42 p.m.

    @jeremy234

    Explain this statement

    "Utah will be fine, now that they have access to a split of PAC money. Schools like BYU...will never again be able to compete against them for recruits however."

    What is your logic behind that statement? Do you have any? Just making ignorant statements of that sort doesn't speak paricularly well to the education being given at the university of utah. Just saying something is going to occur with nothing to back up your claim makes you look like you are just making an emotional statement based on prejudice.

    BYU has a better source of funding than utah does, more stable and much more that can be provided if needed. BYU is funded and run by what would be the equivalent of one of the largest corporations in the entire world, multi billions every single year, an organization that is so well managed that the prospect of not being able to pay what is needed is virtually non existant.

    utah on the otherhand is owned by a state government. Really that is all that needs to be said.

  • Sanefan Wellsville, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:44 p.m.

    The negative unintended consequences will be huge! One I predict will be another whole round(s) of conference re-alighnments. You could see bottom dwellers like Utah, CU, K-State, NC State and others on the outs, while the P5 go after more relevant and competitive teams, like the Boise State's and BYU's of the world! This story line is way from over.
    As some one stated, "be careful of what you ask for, because you might just get it!"

  • Samwise Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:55 p.m.

    SoonerUte,

    From the same ESPN article I quoted from earlier: "Leagues outside the Power Five can opt to adopt the same rules."

    So, leagues outside the P5 can adopt these rules. BYU, being independent will most likely be able to decide if they want to adopt these rules. That is the logical conclusion anyway. You already conceded that BYU can afford these new rules. It is quite obvious they will be allowed to follow them. This will not hurt BYU, and in the long run may well help BYU.

  • Mister J Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:57 p.m.

    to JCS...

    Out of chaos comes order. Look at Switzerland & Italy in the middle ages and what they are famous for now.

    That said, its priceless to see byu fans still on their high horse as they grow more & more distant in the rear view mirror.

  • Mister J Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:58 p.m.

    re: Chris B

    [How's all that "trying" going for you guys?]

    Do or do not. There is no try. - Yoda

  • Down under Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:03 p.m.

    Goodbye to college sports as we know them. Ticket prices will skyrocket when they have to start to pay players and many fans will not be able to afford season tickets. Players will be able to behave anyway they want without any fear of punishment and schools can violate recruiting rules without fear of sanctions. It's all coming. Be careful what you wish for b ecause you may just get it.

  • TroyTown Anaheim, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:14 p.m.

    Mister J

    What's priceless is seeing Utah fans thinking they're on their high horse, when in reality, they've been pushed to the bottom of the heap, their brief nine-year bowl streak now becoming nothing but a distant memory, while BYU looks forward to extending their second longest bowl streak to 10 years.

  • But seriously folks! Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:17 p.m.

    Goodbye title IX. Football will be the only program left on the hill and noone will be able afford to buy tickets. Utah, WSU, and Colorado will be the big losers as they will not be able to compete with the established programs for players and budgets.
    BYU will be just fine. They have a following that extends beyond a few square miles along the foothills of SLC like the u. They are a national brand and will continue to be well into the future.
    Don't get too excited yet u fans, the fallout is coming and I don't think you will like it.

  • Bluto Sandy, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:26 p.m.

    @SoonerUte

    You think the P5's will have autonomy and the other schools will not?
    Bring it on...Every lawyer in America would love to take that case.
    Try to familiarize yourself with the "Equal Protection Clause" of the US Constitution.
    And bone up on Title-9 as well.

    Larry Scott has already stared that UCLA and USC will be allowed to "pay" their players more than say the Washington State's and Utah's of their league. Your nightmare has only just begun.

    BYU, on the other hand, has deep pockets, 400k living alumni, 15 million members of their school's "Sponsoring Institution", ESPN, Legacy and a National Brand, so they will easily match anything Texas, Michigan, Florida, Oregon, Stanford or Alabama does regarding increasing players benefits.

    And if the other 63 D-1 schools start their own division and refuse to play the snooty Elite P-5, not only in football but every other sport, then...do tell...Ute fan, how Utah will ever win 3 games a year, let alone achieving their "Nirvana", of a 6 win season?

    The only thing the U should concern itself with is the rapidly approaching reality of being a have not, within their own league.

  • Mister J Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:38 p.m.

    to Solomon Levi

    "There's a reason why BYU has had a 65,000 seat stadium for over 30 years, while Utah has never had the funds to expand their crackbox of a stadium."

    Really? I almost certain RES expanded for the Winter Games.

    "There's a reason why BYU's athletic depart operates in the black, while Utah's operates in the red."

    Comedy & economics. I love it.

    to TroyTown

    Thanks for proving my point. If you are USC Fan as I suspect then How bout them Bruins?

    I'd bet a Lions share of Ute fan are not resting on their laurels and expecting to be treated like royalty for past accomplishments. Life is about challenges not entitlement.

  • GK Willington Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:40 p.m.

    to Bluto

    Being an alleged have not in a Have league still far exceeds being on the outside and looking in.

  • SoonerUte Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:50 p.m.

    Bluto @SoonerUte "You think the P5's will have autonomy and the other schools will not?"
    Yes.

    If the 65 decide to pay players $2000/month, BYU can decide to pay that or not. BYU cannot decide to pay players more (say $2500) because they are bound to the limit set by the 65. BYU could choose to pay players less, say $1000/month, so maybe that is what you think is autonomy.

    I presume they'd have to pay all players the same amount. So if they usually pay out $1000, but they're competing for a recruit that has been offered $2000, BYU couldn't offer just that one recruit $2000.

  • FatMan86 West Jordan, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:04 p.m.

    Chris B,

    What is missing in your life that you need to be so obnoxious about this stuff? I guess when your team doesn't win, that's all you have. You really should stop using the pronoun "WE". As nothing more than a Utah fan, you do not represent either the PAC or the Big 5. These developments do not make you better than people who support other schools. You could easily just say you are happy with this development and leave it at that, but you insist on running your mouth which makes you look even more silly when your team can't get it done on the field. And rest assured right now they are not getting it done on the field.

  • talkinsports Gilbert, AZ
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:14 p.m.

    theDailyObserver

    "I can't wait until P-5 teams can only play other P-5 teams"

    IF that ever happens, the Utes will never have another winning season.

    Utah fans will learn what fiddling while Rome burns really means.

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:18 p.m.

    I see trouble with the p5 schools/conferences dictating for all other schools. Letting the haves run the shop and giving the others the 'chance' to play along or to opt out will increase inequity in sports. I guess the big boys are working to legislate out the potential Appalachian States from having upset victories.

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:20 p.m.

    @talkinsports - we could assemble quite a list of poor p5 schools that Utah has already joined in football. Vanderbilt, Purdue, Duke, North Carolina, Kentucky, SoMiss, Colorado, WashSt, the list goes on and on. Sure, there can be a breakout year or two but in the end they're all just also-rans, the little struggling fish in the big pond.

  • 54-10 Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:50 p.m.

    Duckhunter
    Highland, UT

    Keep mowing those lawns.

  • Tomahawk Red San Francisco, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:06 p.m.

    VegasUte
    Las Vegas, NV
    I hope it comes from state funds so that byU fans will be paying for our football players' "walking around money"! That would be awesome!!

    ----------

    That would be ironic.

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:12 p.m.

    @WA_Alum&Dad

    I'm a big college football fan, and of college sports in general, and I don't see any way this is beneficial for broader collegiate athletics.

    ---------------

    That's because you don't have a dog in the fight.

    Did you see Division 1 and 2 split as being beneficial? This is similar, they're just creating a Division 4.

    I think it's a good move. Also, from the sounds of it P5 teams will eventually ONLY play other P5 teams and I can also see the playoffs being expanded to 8 teams.

  • theDailyObserver Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:16 p.m.

    talkinsports

    "IF that ever happens, the Utes will never have another winning season."

    Thank you for your unwanted opinion that holds absolutely no weight. College sports, like most everything else, is cyclical. For example, Stanford football was so bad in the few years preceding the Jim Harbaugh era, that school officials were considering disbanding the football program. I bet no Stanford official is thinking that now. Utah football may be down at the moment, but byu is now out of the picture entirely.

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:23 p.m.

    @Bluto

    If I recall correctly, in 2011 you're the same person that said Independence was the future and that teams like Texas and USC were headed for independence over the next 5 years.

    Now you want us to believe that BYU is in good position while your coach is begging the Big 12 for an invite?

    You need to worry less about "outspending" Utah and more about beating Utah, this decade in particular.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:30 p.m.

    @Ute "fans",

    If things cycle and change, then how can you all be so sure that BYU will never be "in"? After all, if the P5 wants to only schedule P5 teams so that every opponent is a worthy opponent, how long will it take until some P5 teams are deemed "unworthy" and are replaced with other teams? Although the SEC and ACC say BYU won't count as a P5 opponent in their new scheduling rules, he PAC has already said that they find BYU to be a good opponent. Even one of the PAC school's AD opted out of playing BYU because their schedule would be too hard with BYU and Michigan the same year.

  • Sanefan Wellsville, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 7:15 p.m.

    @ SoonerUte
    What! The dissolution of rules and ethics in college sports has begun. Another negative unintended consequence that I predict, The P5 will divide and conquer....themselves. You will see each conference eventually making their OWN rules regarding their conferences. The richer of the P5 will being buying the best athletes at a premium price, there will soon be a caste system in the P5 as there is in College football in general. Think you got tired of the SEC winning Championship after Championship, well guess what, that was nothing to what is on the horizon! Unfortunately, most people, including the Commish's of the P5 can only see the golden goose. If you don't remember what happened to the Golden Goose, I suggest you all read the fable!

  • let's roll LEHI, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 7:41 p.m.

    Lot's of speculation and guessing going on...let's just wait and see.

    A couple of things are clear:

    Title IX isn't going away, so what you do for football players you better be ready to do for all scholarship athletes.

    The P5 school official who thinks autonomy will slow down lawsuits knows little about human nature, greed and attorneys.

    If "allowing athletes to pursue other paying careers" while in school is truly on the agenda as stated in the ESPN article, we all better hope that that never passes. If it does there will quickly be haves and have nots in the P5 schools. Every football player at USC, UCLA, Texas and Ohio State will have a $50K/yr. part time job as a movie walk on, rap artist, or corporate intern thanks to boosters. Not sure Crimson Club members will be too thrilled with "autonomy" when they're told they need to provide a $50K/yr. intern job.

  • WhoRtheUtes??? Elko, NV
    Aug. 7, 2014 8:12 p.m.

    This is a great day... Too bad the Utes can't compete with this. Does anyone here really think the tax payers will ante up and say let me pay more so the Utes can win 2 games a year? I hardly think so. But rather, I think the Utes should stand tall and immediately suspend all sports and put those monies to work on research.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 8:23 p.m.

    @ WhoRtheUtes???

    Utah will be fine. This will be an extra couple million dollars added on to the athletics budget. They get a full share of conf. revenue this season and the facilities upgrades are almost complete. Utah will be fine. BYU on the other hand, which is on the outside.....

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 8:27 p.m.

    If the P5 conferences elect to pat student athlete stipends, it will put BYU in an interesting spot in regards to all of their olympic sports. The WCC schools don't have the resources to pay athletes, and I imagine they won't be thrilled if BYU starts paying its athletes. Could be some interesting choices being made by BYU athletics in the near future....

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 8:29 p.m.

    Utah Utes Fan Handbook 2009 Edition:

    "Simply being a 'BCS' school does not mean that you are better than every other school. We proved that last year by beating Alabama in one of their own coveted BCS bowls! We can prove that many, many 'mid-major' schools are better than many so-called 'BCS' schools. 'Mid-major' teams beat 'BCS' teams on a regular basis! Can we honestly be expected to believe that teams like Vanderbilt, Colorado, Perdue, Duke, and Kansas are better than Utah, TCU, BYU, Boise State, and the like? No way! BCS means nothing!"

    Utah Utes Fan Handbook 2014 Edition:

    "All schools in a Power 5 (formerly BCS) conference are superior to anyone not in a Power 5 conference. Don't let anybody ever tell you otherwise. There is no way even the best mid-major could be better than any P5 school. In fact, most P5 coaches want to have P5 teams only play against P5 teams. This is proof that no mid-major can even come close to being as good as a P5 team!"

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 8:40 p.m.

    @ Riverton Cougar

    Which mid-major schools have beaten Utah on a regular basis?

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:11 p.m.

    Wow 85 comments already. This post section might reach 200 comments by Friday night.

    Follow the money. But it's NOT just the money because revenue and the abundance of it can be justified as what it is here in this college football power conference autonomy debate. This largely comes from supply and demand. Basically, despite opposition from some fan bases, many/most of us feed the beast here. Yes money is the foundation in all of this, but it's the corruption and shady circulation and distribution of that money that gives the 'Good Ole Boys' the power. They use a bowl structure and minor tweak playoff system along with mass marketing to keep enough college football fans interested around the country. Some fans who might firmly oppose them tend to not think too much about it if it doesn't effect their team of choice, contrary to a BYU fans possible concerns.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:12 p.m.

    There are schools outside the power 5 in other conferences or independent teams like BYU that are more worthy of inclusion than the bottom half of the schools in the power 5 that feed off of and benefit from the conferences best and historic teams at the top. So, although there are intriguing and competitive positives that some sports fans can see with these changes of Power 5 economic and competitive dominance, there is also an unbalanced prejudice of power. But such is capitalism historically.

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:17 p.m.

    @Bluto

    Larry Scott has already stared that UCLA and USC will be allowed to "pay" their players more than say the Washington State's and Utah's of their league. Your nightmare has only just begun.

    -----------

    Did you just make that up? Cite your source, because Larry Scott nor any-other commissioner has that kind of power.

    Plus according to this article: "A handful of university presidents who spoke at NCAA headquarters after the vote agreed on one thing: Paying athletes to play is off the table."

    I can't imagine any commissioner allowing his league to become "top heavy" by allowing 2-3 teams to play by different set rules then the rest of the league. Plus, he'll need majority approval by the league Presidents.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:20 p.m.

    Here I go with crazy comparisons.

    Take the stock market, it has changed within time cycles of its' history. It used to cater to robber barons. Right now in college football we are seeing this kind of problem with some worthy schools outside the Power 5 that compare on a smaller scale with persons of contribution (great inventors and scientists) a hundred years ago. They were negatively effected via loss of financial prosperity and grant reduction from the 1890s through the 'Great Depession'. In that era (although it's still comparable) it was easy for the big financial players and ultra wealthy controllers of the market to take all the money they could from those that help create it, leaving them with little to stew on. Tesla had much of his physics/science repressed and his inventions patented by the richest profiteers that saw the stock market as their exclusive playground. Obviously there are still and probably always will be moral questions with the market core, but I think the 'Good Ole Boy' network in college football is relegating those outside their circle as being free game for sack, pillage and plunder. A BYU conservative might find capitalism the enemy here.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:21 p.m.

    I have long despised the BCS and the 'Bowl Coalition' that preceded it. Although I was stoked and I still am about Utah being in the PAC 12, I never for a moment switched over into a BCS lover. What we are seeing now with the 'Power 5' autonomy situation disgusts me.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:21 p.m.

    Want to hear a joke?

    "Today’s vote marks a significant step into a brighter future for Division I athletics," said Nathan Hatch, board chair and Wake Forest University president, who also chaired the steering committee that redesigned the structure. "We hope this decision not only will allow us to focus more intently on the well-being of our student-athletes but also preserve the tradition of Division I as a diverse and inclusive group of schools competing together on college athletics’ biggest stage."

    Okay let's break this down. First off it's Wake Forest. They deserve 'Power 5' autonomy about as much as Mickey Mousse. Moving on we have the contradiction of all time; "diverse and inclusive." Those two words go together like sardines on a chocolate cake.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:22 p.m.

    I think athletes should receive compensation for their part in revenue production. They ought to get more in return for the sacrifice of their bodies on the gridiron. But it's a slippery slope. Some schools (think SEC) will place so much value on football glory over education and moral principle, that they will go way overboard relative to what others can keep up with. There are boosters in certain regions with affiliations to certain universities (quiet on specifics) that make their money via corruption. These individuals will also donate their money wrapped in corruption because it comes full circle according to their own narrow minded selfishness. They spend money like they make it. It's all about them and their school.

  • arrogant chickens Sandy, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:39 p.m.

    First the mighty weak Utes ran away from the rivalry, now they're proving that they're so scared of BYU that they'd rather have BYU completely disappear than continue competing against the Cougars on the playing field.

  • SoonerUte Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:54 p.m.

    Sanefan " The dissolution of rules and ethics in college sports has begun... The richer of the P5 will begin buying the best athletes at a premium price, there will soon be a caste system in the P5 as there is in College football in general."
    Sounds horrible. And yet Cougar fans desperately want to be a part of it.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 10:27 p.m.

    @ arrogant chickens

    Whatever helps you sleep at night. Nobody wants BYU to disappear; it's a great rivalry. But BYU's future does seem to be in limbo, and serious decisions are going to have to be made.

  • Whatsnu Sandy, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 10:51 p.m.

    2fer

    "If the P5 conferences elect to pat student athlete stipends, it will put BYU in an interesting spot in regards to all of their Olympic sports. The WCC schools don't have the resources to pay athletes, and I imagine they won't be thrilled if BYU starts paying its athletes. Could be some interesting choices being made by BYU athletics in the near future..."

    You're forgetting, there are schools in the PAC 12 that would have the exact same problem.

    UCLA, USC and Stanford, for example, have outstanding men's volleyball programs, but they compete in the Mountain-Pacific Sports Federation against:

    Brigham Young, Cal Baptist, Cal State Northridge, Hawai'i, Long Beach State, Pepperdine, UC Irvine, UC San Diego, and UC Santa Barbara

    As you can clearly see, the majority of the teams in the best men's volleyball conference in the country aren't from P5 conferences, in fact, many of those schools don't even have a football program.

    USC, UCLA and Stanford could also be forced to make some interesting choices in the future.

  • Uteanymous Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:11 p.m.

    @2fer

    "If the P5 conferences elect to pat student athlete stipends, it will put BYU in an interesting spot in regards to all of their Olympic sports."

    You may have inadvertently revealed the doomsday scenario that could unravel the entire plan.

    There are literally hundreds of minor sports teams from P5 conference schools that compete in other conferences against non-P5 teams - men's volleyball, men's and women's water polo, men's and women's indoor track, and women's lacrosse are examples of teams just in the PAC 12 that would be directly impacted. Without even researching it, it's safe to say that B1G ice hockey teams would also face the same issues.

    The unintended consequences of this stipend paying plan could have nationwide repercussions that could be more far reaching than any of the proponents ever imagined.

    If you think that this is an issue that BYU alone would face, you're sadly mistaken.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:36 p.m.

    "Which mid-major schools have beaten Utah on a regular basis?"

    First of all, you completely missed the point. The point is that Utah fans have done a complete 180 degree turn on their view of elite conferences and "power" teams.

    Secondly, allow me to bring up some non-P5 teams to have beaten Utah on a regular basis:
    BYU (yes, BYU has beaten Utah on a regular basis and holds the longest win streak in the series)
    Boise State
    Air Force (Utah is 5-10 against them; that's regular)
    Hawai'i (14-12, that's regular)
    Idaho (14-12)
    Nevada (4-5)
    San Diego State (7-9-1)

    Plus honorable mention:
    YMCA (0-5)
    Army (0-3; 3 games may not be "regular", but Utah is still winless against them)
    Houston (0-4)

    Utah has also lost many games to Wyoming and Colorado State (BYU also has many losses against these teams, too; they were pretty good at times) and about a dozen to New Mexico (as does BYU).

    Does that answer your question?

  • Surf is Up Miami, FL
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:37 p.m.

    Some of U guys seem to see (read wish) that the future for BYU as it relates to these proceedings is certain. I believe that there will be some severe blow back on the utes and PAC12 bottom dwellers.

    As it has already be stated, the U of U, being true to school color, operates in the red. Therefore in order to even hope to be competetive they will need to beg the state of Utah for money because the other PAC teams will see the previous addition of utah and Colorado as a negative. They will no longer want U to have any more scraps from the table and will proceed to show U the door. Most Utah tax payers proably like BYU.

    BYU will be okay because it has been fiscally responsible and has a fan base with some deep pockets.

    No LDS tithes will be used, so don't even try that attack U guys.

    utah's one hope in all of this is the fact that billionaire Jon Huntsman apparently wants to be broke by the time he dies. Perhaps Chris Hill can convince him to leave a big present for U.

  • 81Ute Central, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:21 a.m.

    @arrogant chickens

    Really? You can't possibly belive those statements, do you? BYU does what is best for BYU, as does USU. Utah will do what is best for Utah. Unfortunately, what is best for the Utes has nothing to do with BYU. I get it, I really do; BYU fans are like the stalking ex...Fatal Attraction like.

    I much preferred it when you BYU fans would complain about having to play Utah. Those time were fun now it is just creepy.

  • 81Ute Central, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:41 a.m.

    I find it interesting that many choose to denigrate Utah for being in the PAC-12. Do you really belive that, we as fans, don't know how difficult the competition is (not just the games but recruiting)? You cast stones about money versus the big boys, as if that matters. I would be a Utah fan if they were still in MWC. I would be a Utah fan if they were in the Big Sky. I would suggest that you take a serious look at the programs you cheer for. The Utes might not be the prettiest girl at the dance but the Utes are at the dance, what about your team? There are continental shifts occuring in college sports, how well positioned is Utah vs BYU or USU?

  • WA_Alum&Dad Marysville, WA
    Aug. 8, 2014 9:47 a.m.

    @ Uteology

    "@WA_Alum&Dad

    I don't see any way this is beneficial for broader collegiate athletics.
    ---------------
    That's because you don't have a dog in the fight."

    As a 50-something, fourth-generation USC fan who has rooted for SC for longer than I have cheered for BYU, I'm willing to bet I've been following PAC teams longer than you have. I most definitely have a dog in the fight. I've watched as deep pocketed boosters and win-at-any-cost coaches have treated USC athletics, especially football, as quazi-pro teams, and I'm sick of it. Collegiate sports is supposed to be about more than just winning.

    You newcomers to a "big-boy" conference can be forgiven for not seeing the ugly side of it yet.

    USC, as a private school with huge endowments will always have the resources to be one of the innovators in gaming the new system, at the expense of schools such as Utah. And I will watch the continued corruption of the crimson and gold. How is that a win for either of us?

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 9:54 a.m.

    @81Ute - I don't think BYU fans are the stalkers, see any comments on BYU articles and you'll see more Ute fans commenting and arguing than BYU fans on Ute articles.

    @81Ute - As for future alignment it'll all be up in the air anyway. Those p5 schools who are top of the heap will continue to dictate the future of college sports. You can't tell me that USC, UCLA, Stanford, Oregon and others would pass up a chance to form a super conference with Texas, OK, OKState and others. The weaker members of the conference will be discarded at that point. And a team like BYU might find its way into the mix. So please quit talking like this is all a done deal and that change will not occur in the future, changes will continue.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:36 a.m.

    @ Riverton Cougar

    Why wouldn't we? The status quo has changed and we're on the inside.

    As for which mid-majors have regularly beaten Utah, obviously the question implies the word currently. You did a lot of dancing, but the answer is nobody.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:44 a.m.

    @ Surf is Up

    How much do you think this is going to cost per year? Stipends will fall between 3-5 thousand dollars per year, per athlete. That is only a couple million at most. Utah is receiving a full revenue share this year, and yes, Utah has a large bank of alumni with deep pockets. Utah is in a great position, and will be just fine....

  • ekute Layton, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 12:58 p.m.

    The angst in happy valley is funny. This doesn't hurt byu...for now, and the rest of the mid-majors, like byu, are all for it. As long as ND stays independent accommodations will be made and byu will continue to ride it's coat tails, putting together it's own irrelevant schedules and meaningless prearranged bowls.

  • BayAreaCougar Pleasanton, CA
    Aug. 8, 2014 1:47 p.m.

    @Two For Flinching and others

    The issues that will hurt Utah and likely BYU is that the stipends will likely be based on cost of attendance calculations used for Pell Grants. When a kid is given the option of going to USC with a $3800 stipend and Utah or BYU with a $1200 stipend then you better hope that the kid is as good at math as he is at football.

    Don't think that the big schools are going to say having an equal amount for each school works because a $2500 stipend in LA won't go as far as in SLC. Do you really think that USC and UCLA would choose to put themselves at a competitive disadvantage like that.

    If anything BYU's Independence might free it up more from a conference's "calculations" and allow potentially more spending power (compared to cost of living) that the schools in the south (LSU and Alabama) are going to insist on.

    There are a lot of unintended consequences lurking here, I don't think most are going to be good for Utah and BYU.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:25 p.m.

    @2fer

    I think a university with a major sports program like, BYU or utah, has somewhere in the vicinity of 700 athletes on scholarship each year. If we took the high number of $5000 each that is an extra $3.5 mil per year, if we use $3000 each that is $2.1 mil.

    Yes both BYU and utah can probably handle that cost but of course that isn't all of it. They are also talking about ongoing medical care, maybe for life, and other things as well. I don't know what medical insurance for a group of 700 athletes costs but let's say $2000 each per year, just a guess I admit it might be more, and then take a 4 year cycle of athletes which is about 700, then multiply that out you are talking about substantial cost, especially as it compounds over the decades. If you add up say 5 cycles of 4 years that would be a cost of 6 mil per year in ongoing healthcare costs for those athletes.

    Just an interesting thing to consider what those costs may grow to become.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:30 p.m.

    There are also the other costs they are discussing like feeding all of them, ongoing education even after they leave school, and other things. The cost could get to be quite large, and probably will. Once again i think BYU is capable of handling that if they choose, I'm not quite as sure about utah although I think they could handle most of them if they plan for it accordingly.

    But it can add up and inequities in budgets between schools, even those in the same conference, will make it so that some will probably be able to do all of it at a high level and some will not. I do htink there are issue hear that are unforseen that will arise as well. Considering most schools, including most p5 schools, operate in the red already it will be interesting to see how many can handle all of the costs.

  • Uteanymous Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:39 p.m.

    ekute

    If Utah is doing so well financially, why is their athletic program operating in the red?

    And why can't the school afford to fix it's crumbling classrooms - over $400 million in deferred maintenance?

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 5:08 p.m.

    @ekute

    uteanymous asked some questions that deserve an answer although I doubt you are the one that can actually give us those answers. utah has had a large influx of revenue yet it still runs in the red several millions per year on top of being subsidized several million more per year. And he is correct about the massive backlog the university has in maintenance that has been left undone which means the infrastructure at the university is crumbling in some ways.

    Obviously that cannot continue to be the case, the athletic department cannot continue to take subsidies from the school when the school cannot even maintain its own infrastructure.

    What is the plan, and the schedule, to fix these issues?

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 5:16 p.m.

    @WA_Alum&Dad
    Marysville, WA

    @ Uteology

    "@WA_Alum&Dad

    I don't see any way this is beneficial for broader collegiate athletics.
    ---------------
    That's because you don't have a dog in the fight."

    As a 50-something, fourth-generation USC fan who has rooted for SC for longer than I have cheered for BYU, I'm willing to bet I've been following PAC teams longer than you have.

    ==============================

    You're a 4th generation USC fan? Who is a Washington alum (per your screen name)?

    Cowboy up and take ownership of your real team, BYU. It's okay, nothing to be ashamed about.

    Bottom line, this is a good thing for college football, just like the D1 and D2 split in 1973.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 6:39 p.m.

    "As for which mid-majors have regularly beaten Utah, obviously the question implies the word currently. You did a lot of dancing, but the answer is nobody."

    What is your definition of "current"? What about "regular"?

    And how about I ask you a similar question: Which mid-majors have beaten BYU on a regular basis?

  • WA_Alum&Dad Marysville, WA
    Aug. 9, 2014 3:22 p.m.

    @Uteology
    Interesting how Ute fans can imply that BYU fans are liars, but when BYU fans try to respond, their comments are denied.

    Born and bred in So Cal. 26 years with California as my home base, during which time I attended BYU. Moved to Washington State to work. There is life outside of Utah.

    Not taking people at their word = projection, perhaps?