Author
|
Topic: Random Sports Discussion (Read 335432 times)
|
Ceryse
Terracotta Army
Posts: 879
|
The lockout.. ugh. I could probably write a decently sized book on why there is a lockout and just poorly both sides have managed it, especially from a PR stand point. You know its bad when even in Canada full-on apathy has kicked in over hockey. Both sides are to blame for it (owners more-so in the beginning, now its fairly even in the blame-game). The basic points of contention; splitting the pie that is HRR (hockey related revenue) between owners and players, make-whole provisions (owners paying out money so as to prevent the players from taking a massive roll-back in salaries due to the lowering of their piece of the HRR pie from 57% to 50%), revenue-sharing between teams, cap on contract lengths (players have begun to cave on this one) and CBA length (players will cave on this one if they grasp why the league is pushing for 10 years with an opt out after 8).
From most minor to most important, in some more detail;
That's the short of it. I could easily do 5-10 pages on each item and go into the nitty-gritty details, including breakdowns and charts comparing the old CBA (which reads like shit, but decent enough bathroom reading material...) and the negotiations for the new one.
But the tldr version of the lockout? None of the negotiating matters until around January 5-10th where you'll either see a deal put together and a 44-48 game season or see the entire season go down the drain. If the season is lost watch for the players to shoot themselves in the foot via decertification of the union. Also, that right now, in Canada, the owners barely edge out the players in terms of fan support, mainly because of how bad the players and Fehr have been at managing the PR aspect of the lockout and how the owners have gone from even worse to much better in the last month of PR management. Finally, there is more discord between players than there is owners. In the end, unless this thing goes before the courts (in which case.. you will see the NHL die), the owners will win more than they lose.
|
|
|
|
Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280
Auto Assault Affectionado
|
I don't see much downside to a decert.
|
The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT. Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
|
|
|
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 23626
|
|
|
|
|
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075
Error 404: Title not found.
|
And of course, the forward goes down like a whiny bitch when he gets owned twice.
As a goalkeeper, this video makes me happy!
|
CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
|
|
|
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 23626
|
He did get kicked in the shin, and it was as good a time as any to work on his acting skills.
|
|
|
|
ghost
|
That's fucking amazing.
|
|
|
|
Megrim
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2512
Whenever an opponent discards a card, Megrim deals 2 damage to that player.
|
If one were to be looking to start playing American Football here in kangarooland, can you guy recommend any reading or info one should look at to better understand the game? I'm thinking not only the basic rules, but also positions, specific plays, what's expected of different types of players, etc...
|
One must bow to offer aid to a fallen man - The Tao of Shinsei.
|
|
|
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335
|
Man...American Football is ridiculously complicated. There are like...a billion rules.
|
vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
|
|
|
Shannow
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3703
|
Do we have enough interest to start a 'soccer' thread? Premier League hipsters, Ronaldo vs Messi flame wars, the one guy whos a Serie A fan? And where I can brag how I used a video game to turn my son into a soccer fan?
|
Someone liked something? Who the fuzzy fuck was this heretic? You don't come to this website and enjoy something. Fuck that. ~ The Walrus
|
|
|
ghost
|
Here's an interesting article on the spending in college athletics (Warning- it's Fox News). Apparently the big six spend over six figures per athlete (meaning not just football players) as compared to something just over the teens for the average academic student. This highlights a few things: 1. If you aren't going to spend the money you might as well get out. The SEC and Pac 12 and BIG Ten are swinging big sticks. 2. The world of college athletics has completely bastardized the mission of many of these schools. Yes, you can argue that the football and basketball brings in money and is marketing, but I doubt that it is actually paying its way when you look at all the figures. This is undoubtedly true at all smaller schools. 3. The sham of college athletes being "amateur" in status really should end immediately. Sure, they're getting an education, but for some of them that is like giving me a trip to go big game hunting in Africa- I have no fucking interest in that and they don't have any interest in the education that is being provided. The schools should pay the players straight up and let them use the money for education if they want. 4. It is probably shocking the amount of money that the SEC, Big Ten and PAC12 schools spend on their football players as this is for all athletes, not just for the Alabama football squad. It could be upwards of $400,000 to $500,000 per player in the big leagues. The study finds the largest gap by far in the Southeastern Conference, which combines relatively low academic spending and explosive coaching salaries. Median athletic spending there totaled nearly $164,000 per athlete in 2010. That is more than 12 times the $13,390 that SEC schools spent per student for academic expenses, including instructional costs and student services.
|
|
|
|
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075
Error 404: Title not found.
|
My guess, without digging into the numbers, is that those per student spending numbers included facilities and a stadium, when in reality they shouldn't. It artificially inflates the spending number.
Those building assets are related to the revenue, not the student. The student turns over yearly. Why attach those dollars to them? It should be about the variable costs associated with each kid.
|
CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
|
|
|
ghost
|
It is highly likely that the article is going off of the yearly athletic budgets of the universities, which makes complete sense.
|
|
|
|
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075
Error 404: Title not found.
|
As an example I pulled UGA's Atheletic 990. They have $78M in expenses and 614 scholarship athletes. That's pretty close to $127k a kid. Pretty close to their $100k average number tossed about.
However, what does that include? Well the bulk of it isn't scholarships at all that's only $10.6M as grants to the university. Nope, the majority is $27.6M in salaries, and $40M in "Other expenses"
What does Other include? $6M of depreciation, $5M of repairs, $1.6M of recruiting, $2.8M of interest, $3M of office expenses, $1M of investment management, $1M in professional fees, $1.5M in occupany, $7.5M of miscellaneous. That's about $30M of expenses and $15M salaries of general and admin unrelated to coaching.
So $45M have nothing to do with the kids. Nothing. It's just overhead. Take that $78M down to $33M? It's about $53k a kid. Hardly shocking.
|
CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
|
|
|
ghost
|
So $45M have nothing to do with the kids. Nothing. It's just overhead. Take that $78M down to $33M? It's about $53k a kid. Hardly shocking.
You can't do it that way. Those costs wouldn't exist if it weren't for the sports program.
|
|
|
|
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 23626
|
If one were to be looking to start playing American Football here in kangarooland, can you guy recommend any reading or info one should look at to better understand the game? I'm thinking not only the basic rules, but also positions, specific plays, what's expected of different types of players, etc...
Play Madden? There are books that that teach that sort of thing but they may be hard to get down there unless you want to ship them from US sellers. You could try a good public library. Some books you might want to look for: Football for Dummies (by Howie Long, make sure you get the one with the American football on the cover) -- For an overview of the game NFL: Play Football! -- Meant for kids learning how to play (no we male Americans aren't born knowing how to play out of the womb) but it'll teach you the basic mechanics The Illustrated NFL Playbook -- Book for learning about formations and plays (i.e. the "X's" and "O's" of football), sadly out of print (and out-of-date). This book was bundled with the classic football game NFL Challenge.
|
|
|
|
Shannow
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3703
|
I'd just find the local league and rock up and say you want to play. Usually groups like this love having natives join wanting to learn their game. The Australian Rules football team here in Boston really enjoy teaching Americans how to play a real code..
|
Someone liked something? Who the fuzzy fuck was this heretic? You don't come to this website and enjoy something. Fuck that. ~ The Walrus
|
|
|
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075
Error 404: Title not found.
|
So $45M have nothing to do with the kids. Nothing. It's just overhead. Take that $78M down to $33M? It's about $53k a kid. Hardly shocking.
You can't do it that way. Those costs wouldn't exist if it weren't for the sports program. Yes, I can. Those costs exist because the program serves all the fans, not the athletes. They have nothing to do with those actual variable costs of the kids (housing, board, coaching, medical, training, scholarship, etc.) The athletes don't need a stadium, the fans do. They don't need people to sell them tickets, soft drinks, or do the accounting. The fans do. The majority of those fixed costs are associated with bringin the game to the fans, not the kids. They could literally cut all those costs and still have a product on the field. Watch an FCS game. Idaho State's stadium was built for $2.8M and holds 12,000 people. The fixed costs like that are just multipliers of the fanbase, not the kids involved.
|
CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
|
|
|
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 42632
the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring
|
Do we have enough interest to start a 'soccer' thread? Premier League hipsters, Ronaldo vs Messi flame wars, the one guy whos a Serie A fan? And where I can brag how I used a video game to turn my son into a soccer fan? I used to start one every season, but fell off when I stopped the EPL fantasy league. Go ahead and start one and I'll be sure to join in.
|
|
|
|
Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280
Auto Assault Affectionado
|
So $45M have nothing to do with the kids. Nothing. It's just overhead. Take that $78M down to $33M? It's about $53k a kid. Hardly shocking.
You can't do it that way. Those costs wouldn't exist if it weren't for the sports program. Yes, I can. Those costs exist because the program serves all the fans, not the athletes. They have nothing to do with those actual variable costs of the kids (housing, board, coaching, medical, training, scholarship, etc.) The athletes don't need a stadium, the fans do. They don't need people to sell them tickets, soft drinks, or do the accounting. The fans do. The majority of those fixed costs are associated with bringin the game to the fans, not the kids. They could literally cut all those costs and still have a product on the field. Watch an FCS game. Idaho State's stadium was built for $2.8M and holds 12,000 people. The fixed costs like that are just multipliers of the fanbase, not the kids involved. And on top of that the number being tossed out doesn't seem to give any consideration to how much revenue is brought back by spending those dollars in the first place? So, yeah.
|
The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT. Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
|
|
|
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613
|
Wouldn't it be refreshing if the NCAA just stopped calling the players "student athletes" and started calling them "employees"? The whole "amateur" farce is getting tired.
|
"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."
- Mark Twain
|
|
|
ghost
|
Yes, I can. Those costs exist because the program serves all the fans, not the athletes. They have nothing to do with those actual variable costs of the kids (housing, board, coaching, medical, training, scholarship, etc.) The athletes don't need a stadium, the fans do. They don't need people to sell them tickets, soft drinks, or do the accounting. The fans do. The majority of those fixed costs are associated with bringin the game to the fans, not the kids.
They could literally cut all those costs and still have a product on the field. Watch an FCS game. Idaho State's stadium was built for $2.8M and holds 12,000 people. The fixed costs like that are just multipliers of the fanbase, not the kids involved.
Okay, you're right. If you got rid of the football program those costs would still exist. Good thing you have a CPA degree to figure that out. Oh, and the FCS schools and low level FBS schools that you're talking about are some of those that typically lose the most money.
|
|
« Last Edit: January 16, 2013, 03:05:07 PM by ghost »
|
|
|
|
|
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075
Error 404: Title not found.
|
Profit has nothing to do with costs in that article. You've hit on the absurd part of piece.
What they should actually do isn't costs. They should show exactly how much profit each athlete brings in per high level program.
|
CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
|
|
|
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613
|
I don't think that you can measure profit in dollars. Most university athletic programs reinvest the money in the program and the only benefit that the university gains is in terms of marketing exposure. Athletic departments are nothing more than a marketing engine for universities. If they generate no net revenue, that's fine. They are worth billions of dollars annually in exposure.
|
"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."
- Mark Twain
|
|
|
ghost
|
Since.... A total of 14 athletics programs in the FBS reported positive net revenues for the 2009 fiscal year, which represents a decrease from the 25 reported in 2008. The gap between the “profitable” programs and the remainder continued to grow, however a bit more slowly. (3.5) .....I think your interest in profit is completely irrelevant. Source. Quote is from page 8.
|
|
|
|
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075
Error 404: Title not found.
|
Because they are non-profit their version of "profit" is very different. In reality, a lot of programs generate a true profit before they send out grants.
|
CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
|
|
|
ghost
|
But that isn't applicable in this case. Almost all of the money goes back into the sports programs, even in the 14 profitable schools.
|
|
|
|
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075
Error 404: Title not found.
|
That's my point, it doesn't. That 10M I listed in grants was just offshoots to the regular university. So in essence, one of their major expenses is revenue sharing with the school itself from the association.
|
CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
|
|
|
ghost
|
The $10 million in grants-in-aid probably doesn't even cover the tuition from their student athletes. Also, Georgia is one of the few profitable schools, so you can't use them as a real-world example.
|
|
|
|
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075
Error 404: Title not found.
|
Alright I'm not going to argue this with you because it's stupid. I do not-for-profit audits on this kind of stuff, if they aren't at least covering their variable expenses they simply don't have programs. I'll leave it at that. Believe what you want to believe in a FOX article and an NCAA report.
|
CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
|
|
|
ghost
|
You do audits for NCAA football programs and athletic departments?
|
|
|
|
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 23626
|
Cut it out you two.
|
|
|
|
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15163
|
Because they are non-profit their version of "profit" is very different. In reality, a lot of programs generate a true profit before they send out grants.
I love phrases like "in reality" that have nothing to do with reality. Especially when there's a study that's actually being talked about that shows that it's not "in reality". College athletics is fun to watch, fun to root for, and has exactly shit and nothing to do with college except the names on the uniforms and the stadiums (increasingly empty except for the top 15 or so Division I universities) that it's played in. Otherwise it's a minor league that makes a ton of money for somebody, but it sure as hell isn't feeding back into the alleged core mission of educational institutions that bear a lot of uncompensated costs for someone else's profits.
|
|
|
|
ghost
|
Because they are non-profit their version of "profit" is very different. In reality, a lot of programs generate a true profit before they send out grants.
I love phrases like "in reality" that have nothing to do with reality. Especially when there's a study that's actually being talked about that shows that it's not "in reality". College athletics is fun to watch, fun to root for, and has exactly shit and nothing to do with college except the names on the uniforms and the stadiums (increasingly empty except for the top 15 or so Division I universities) that it's played in. Otherwise it's a minor league that makes a ton of money for somebody, but it sure as hell isn't feeding back into the alleged core mission of educational institutions that bear a lot of uncompensated costs for someone else's profits. You should look at that NCAA study I linked above. It agrees very well with everything you just said.
|
|
|
|
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15163
|
|
|
|
|
ghost
|
Yeah, I read that after someone put it on Facebook. It's pretty nice to know that there are still some people with ethics in this world.
|
|
|
|
|
|