bleujay

Really nothing to see here. I talked with a lawyer friend of mine and he basically said this suit is to help Toronto get their foot back in the door...They didn't cry foul in the 90's so they don't have much legal stance to do so now..

Not that I know much about Husker bball recruiting pre-2011ish, but from an outsider's perspective I feel that Miles has improved upon previous coaches. Especially this 2015 class, which could come together for NU quite nicely. White was a great pickup and, no matter what delusional cu fans will say, you also have to give credit to Miles for picking out two players who had talent but not the right system to prove themselves (TP and walter). All that said, I tend to agree with Norm in that you can't try to objectify basketball recruiting services and the ratings they give to players. "Stars" are worthless... and outside of the top100-150 players, a lot of evaluations are worthless as well. Some evaluations occur when recruits are underclassmen...and they don't get updated even once. When I'm looking at a recruit's "pedigree", I look at scholarship offers. What is the average level of school that offered this player a scholarship? Donkey is right, you can't trust the websites on this either...but if you dig deep enough on Twitter/ google news more often than not you can get a pretty good idea about where a recruit stands. In the end...the only talent evaluators that really matter are coaching staffs. Recruiting services are meant to be read by fans who want to feel like experts. In reality, basketball recruiting services on the internet are extremely flawed, and trying to "objectively" assess your program's recruiting upswing using them is pointless.

Or...maybe you can just keep your bluejay/BigLeast/mid-major koolaid drinking sentiment on your Creighton board, rather than going out of your way to create an account and bring those delusions to a Nebraska/BigTen/Power5Conference board...There was a reason for the ESPN documentary "Requiem For The Big East" and it's not because the future of the league is bright. Like I said, your denial is the 1st of 5 stages... Are you incapable of addressing the points that I've brought up? I feel as if I've been objective and reasonable in what I've said in this thread. I do not wish to foster an inferiority complex between CU and NU. If you want to that's fine but keep me out of it. All I'm asking you is to respond to my criticisms of the main premise of your article - that is, stipends for athletic players will be so high that only schools with football revenue will remain competitive. Please

The SEC doesn't deal with bad PR surrounding the reputation that a few of its schools carry. Journalists occasionally make the offhanded comment in their football articles but that's about all the attention it receives. You don't think that the entirety of Div 1 being singlehandedly screwed over by the top 10 schools in BCS would create more of a public outcry? Really? Alright, I guess if I can't convince you of that then you'll just have to know that you're right and wait to see what happens. I'm willing to bet money that what you're predicting does not happen in anyway, shape or form. It actually seems to me like you're in denial that this change isn't going to affect the Big East that much... but I won't say it out loud because that's rude and unbecoming of friendly discussion edit: http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2014/08/09/ed-obannon-ncaa-claudia-wilken-appeal-name-image-likeness-rights Claudia Wilken ruled that athletes can only be compensated 5k a year for their NIL's, and that's it. A lot of schools will not have trouble keeping up with that spending

From a business standpoint, it would make very little sense for the power 5 conferences not to do everything within their power to give themselves the greatest advantage possible. This will be achieved by investing so much money into their programs/facilities/athletes/etc that the non-power 5 conferences have no chance of keeping up. Schools that do not have football revenue will not be able to keep up. Until now, the NCAA has stopped the power 5 conference schools from spending as much money as they can afford to spend...now those restrictions are lifted, so these schools will spend the money.The NCAA has the right to intervene if they feel the Power 5 has crossed a line. AND the guidelines that the Power 5 creates are still going to have to be voted on by all Div 1 schools. I'm sorry but I disagree that big football schools are going to take over. You said that schools w/out fb revenue wouldn't be able to 'keep up'. Assuming that the cap on spending per recruit was so high that only schools with large, profitable football programs could max out their recruiting needs each year in both major sports without a significant financial burden... that is a TON of cash you're talking about. It would be a ridiculous amount and there's no way the NCAA lets that fly. There's also no way the mid-tier BCS schools (Kstate, Oregon St, Wash St, Gtech types) would let that type of legislation through as well. That would be a system where maybe 15 schools basically become pro factories with athletes living in mansions off campus. Congress would most likely get involvedYou're failing to take into account that one of the main reasons that this passed is because the power 5 conferences said that if they weren't given the right to make their own rules, then they were going to break away from the NCAA and/or form their own Division 4 league. The NCAA may, in theory, have some legislation power here, but, in reality, their power is now far less than you believe it to be. You are also failing to consider that the new TV contracts, which will soon be negotiated...there is about to be another substantial boost in revenue in 2016 for the power 5 conferences which are football revenue schools...these schools have to spend the money on "expenses" for tax purposes.Also, as far as the bottom-tier teams in the power 5 conferences not being able to keep up...there are 2 possibilities: 1.) Conference-wide revenue sharing, which would help the bottom tier teams Or 2.) There will be another split inside the Power 5 conferences down the road because the bottom of the Power 5 won't be able to support the changes. (Gerry DiNardo's theory) Also, if congress were to get involved...I highly doubt it would be to handcuff these schools, so all of the mid-midmajor programs without football revenue can keep up...it would more likely be to challenge their nonprofit status. Again, Denial is the 1st of 5 stages... Alright, so assuming the Power Five acts with absolutely no restraint regarding spending limits to benefit only the top schools in each conference (a move which would be a huge PR blow and, imo, cause significant public backlash), what spending is going to increase? The giant programs can already spend as much as they want on new facilities, head coach salaries etc. The ONLY additional cost to schools that these changes bring are stipends given to athletes per year. And you're saying that one singular cost increase is going to be so large that no schools without massive fb revenue will remain relevant. That is what you are saying? Please clarify because, if that's what you're actually trying to say, then I wholeheartedly disagree with you because that's just way too much money. Way too much. Most experts are putting the stipend limit around 5k per year. Those stipends would easily be 5 digits annually. State government would get involved with public schools. They wouldn't allow that sort of thing to happen at a public institution of higher education

From a business standpoint, it would make very little sense for the power 5 conferences not to do everything within their power to give themselves the greatest advantage possible. This will be achieved by investing so much money into their programs/facilities/athletes/etc that the non-power 5 conferences have no chance of keeping up. Schools that do not have football revenue will not be able to keep up. Until now, the NCAA has stopped the power 5 conference schools from spending as much money as they can afford to spend...now those restrictions are lifted, so these schools will spend the money. The NCAA has the right to intervene if they feel the Power 5 has crossed a line. AND the guidelines that the Power 5 creates are still going to have to be voted on by all Div 1 schools. I'm sorry but I disagree that big football schools are going to take over. You said that schools w/out fb revenue wouldn't be able to 'keep up'. Assuming that the cap on spending per recruit was so high that only schools with large, profitable football programs could max out their recruiting needs each year in both major sports without a significant financial burden... that is a TON of cash you're talking about. It would be a ridiculous amount and there's no way the NCAA lets that fly. There's also no way the mid-tier BCS schools (Kstate, Oregon St, Wash St, Gtech types) would let that type of legislation through as well. That would be a system where maybe 15 schools basically become pro factories with athletes living in mansions off campus. Congress would most likely get involved

BB almost always has something intelligent to add to the conversation.. CU fans want Watson pretty bad. The staff is in on one or two other point guards for the class, but it's evident that he's the number 1 target. The last 3 players to visit Creighton have all committed so I like our chances once he gets to campus

That was poor journalism today by Shatel. The premise of the article is that CU and other schools in the BE don't get fb revenue = not enough $$$ to stay relevant in terms of recruiting against the 'power five'. Someone who is more educated on the financial side of this equation would have to do some number crunching but I do not think CU or most members of the Big East (as well as the AAC or MWC, BYU/ Zaga) will have trouble keeping up with the money being thrown around by the 'power five' basketball schools. The only scenario where I see us possibly running into trouble is if there's not a hard cap on how much can be spent on a player per year - and that won't happen, because at that point there's no real difference between the NCAA and the NFL/NBA other than average skill level of player This development has a much, much larger impact on football recruiting, imo. That's where there's a ton of money involved - 85 players to field an entire roster. Scholarship offers are often thrown around in football like free candy, but now each offer will hold a lot of value for both player and university. It makes me worry about colleges where football is favored by tradition/culture/boosters, but basketball is still relevant I.E. Nebraska, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Michigan in the B1G. FSU, Florida also come to mind. How much budget will be 'leftover' after football is taken care of for these schools to keep bringing in top talents for basketball?

Sorry Norm but I think it was basically all my doing. i figured there were at least a few people who would enjoy reading the underground spewage about jacobson. A lot of it was quite fascinating to read

here's a link http://bluejayunderground.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2487&sid=7dbd91668ec85ddd12959aaf2717b3fb&start=1020 don't know proper etiquette on this board etc. , just presenting info for anyone who cares to see... edit the conversation surrounding jacobson starts on page 101(!!!) of the thread...

Don't mean to be a polemicist but... some interesting conversation going on in BJU's OT board right now regarding Jacobson..