There's little wisdom in having 15 conference finals (last games of conference tourneys after the reg season and before the national playoffs) in NCAA Division I on the same day as MLS Cup. It's something like the Big 12, ACC, and SEC having their championship games the same day as the Super Bowl. I doubt it has too much effect on attendence/viewership for either, but where's the wisdom? I don't know what time today the college games are, but for the sake of building some tradition, such a conflict should be avoided. A big question remains, should MLS go the path of NHL/MLB or NBA/NFL in terms of developing talent ages 18-22. The NBA is drifting towards the NHL/MLB setup. Or can college soccer remain in the middle. Should it aim to be a revenue sport or an olympic sport?
Isn't the match at the HDC too? For some reason I thought I heard LA would host all those big matches again. If that is the case then it should be a double header.
what match? I'm not talking about the NCAA Championship game, just the conference tournament finals. college soccer still has a national playoffs that'll start later.
its not that MLS Cup conflicts with NCAA, but that NCAA conflicts with MLS Cup. and youre right, such conflicts should be avoided
I wasn't assigning blame, but yes I agree the NCAA should be the one to agree to take a back seat on this one. It looks like the Big East and ACC games will be over before MLS Cup at least.
That's just one of many things wrong with NCAA soccer. They don't even play by the laws of the game! It's just stupid that NCAA doesn't collaborate with USSoccer and MLS.
ncaa doesn't care about fifa, ussf, mls although, if the ncaa ever got their act together and paid athletes... things might get extremely interesting (men's soccer, basketball, football, even baseball)
Or they could just get their act together and hold them to something close to D-III standards so that the idea of student-athletes wouldn't be a joke these days. Or if these kids want to be paid they can just not play college soccer and not have to bother with those pesky degree requirements.
when there's money to be had at the pro level and their is a line that limits players... you're going to see bad things happen... like maurice clarret... like kids going "pro" that don't get drafted so give 'em an idea what they are worth... pay them... they make the schools money... and if they have contracts with the schools... it makes getting them all the more interesting for the pro leagues ******** 'em all (leagues, teams, owners) and reward the players it's rather ridiculous to see some of the contracts college basketball and football coaches get when everyone they coach is an amatuer...
actually, they don't really make the schools much money, because all the revenue is sunk back into the Athletic Departments. It really is a viscious circle, because they need to spend all that money on stadiums and coaches and everything to be able to maximize their revenue, and they depend on that revenue to sustain their spending patterns. All in all, it just isn't quite seemly for academic institutions. The athletes are the victims, but I wouldn't cry too much for them, because most of them either end up as rich pros or as college graduates. Yeah, I'm a NESCAC snob, so what?
yeah, yeah, yeah most b-ball programs make money.... it's the football that doesn't either way... coaches are getting paid huge amounts of money to coach amateurs and schools are making money (and getting exposure they wouldn't otherwise get)
besides... the whole notion of having these kids under contract is a means of making money sell them to the highest bidder... trade them for someone else... whatever...
yeah, College football is more or less 90% of the issue. And yes, the coaches salaries are astronomical and ridiculous. The best is when they consider themselves part of the faculty, even though they get paid way more than any tenured professor to shout obscenities for two hours a day. And the NFL and NBA are guilty of basically relying on academic institutions to do the dirty (and expensive) work of player development that MLB and the NHL do. Paying the players solves a problem, it just doesn't solve the right one. Still, as far as soccer players go, this situation does not exist. The disparity between an athletic scholarship and a base professional contract is no where near a large for a soccer player as for a sport like football and basketball. And these days it is increasingly rare for extremely talented soccer players to go the college route.
it does depending on how it's done but pay 'em... there are too many filthy people involved in college sports giving handouts to students... make it legal for these athletes to get the money coming to them, instead of getting illegal handouts from some piece of crap trying to get someone to tank the game for him... or whatever piece of crap thing they want the athlete for i can go to college and get a nice paying internship (and i did), but someone can't do something similar for sports??
i'm not too concerned about the percentage... losses are easy to create for public display... it's another story if it's true the university of illinois sucks at football and probably will most every year... they still draw 40k in their own stadium... sell oodles of memorabilia all over the place (which is another reason to have the football program... sell more stuff that ain't necessarily going down as football income)... and have to turn a profit i'm sure they can write a loss down and have everyone buy it.. but i won't... which isn't even getting into how the programs keep the school at a higher profile... helping to receive more money from successful students (or hell, anyone) and i should note... yes, 40k is a crapload for college football... but being in the big ten (and one of the worst attended teams in that, i might add)... means more money devoted to the program, higher profile coaches, more spent on recruiting... but again all covered... so it's also easier for smaller schools to make money with smaller crowds
or go the other way and scale back the college sports/entertainment business. It's already happening with Basketball. Who knows what shape NCAA basketball will be in in 10 years if the current trends of straight out of highschool pros and internationalization continue? Football will be the last big hold out, but maybe college Presidents will eventually realize that big time college football is a huge yolk around the necks of every school not named Notre Dame. I know it is a pipe dream, especially because a lot of people really love college football. Still, the problems it creates aren't getting smaller, and it essentially puts fundamentally academic institutions in an untenable position. Is the fundamental goal of the University of Nebraska to educate the young men and women of Nebraska or to provide sports entertainment for the state's television audiences? Paying the players doesn't address that situation, it just cynically undermines it. That's just more money going to the Athletic Department and less going to the Library. You can't serve two masters.
If and when this country gets more soccer academies like Bradenton (sp?) you will see more and more 16-18 year olds entering MLS directly and the NCAA soccer will be increasingly marginalized. If NCAA wants to stay relevant they should get on board now.