Is there an inflection point for Vandy in college athletics' future?

[AuricGoldfinger]

I had a long drive this past weekend and too much time to think, and I began reflecting on all of the changes we've witnessed in college athletics just over the last month or so. It also got me thinking about a rather existential question--what's the point at which Vanderbilt (and other universities) decides to change direction regarding college athletics, either voluntarily or involuntarily? Or is there ever such a point?

No, I don't think that time is at hand, nor do I think that VU's place in the SEC or in the college athletics hierarchy is at risk any time soon. But what would precipitate a seismic change in that position? I think it would clearly be motivated by football or be football-related, as nearly everything in college sports is and has been for at least 30 years.

Could VU be asked to leave the SEC? Sure, but not likely. I realize it's a difference in semantics, but I think it is more likely the major brands of college football decide to do their own thing and form a so-called super football conference, leaving a handful of SEC and other P5 schools to fight for scraps and consider whether to offer football at all. That would be an involuntary inflection point.

The two events I see as possible voluntary inflection points would be if (1) the SEC members decided to vote revenue shares based upon some kind of performance or contribution metric, and/or (2) a true pay-for-play system. I don't think we're close to one or both events, but I could envision Vanderbilt saying that either was a bridge too far for the institution and deciding to join another conference, quit college football, and/or drop to another level of college sports.

What do you think? This post isn't intended to be a gloomy look into a crystal ball, and I feel better about our university athletics leadership than I have in a long time. But given the changes we're seeing in college sports, at what point does Vandy say, "And for that reason, I'm out"?

[LawoftheWest]

Good questions, Auric.
I have a somewhat different question. Will TV, the driving force behind so much of football, continue to grow its audience? I think it is possible that as younger people grow older their interests will lie elsewhere, other than college football.

My assumptions are younger people:
1. have so many other forms of entertainment, from video games to all of the for pay channels. Cable TV is being replaced with alternative channels.
2. have grown up using phones, tablets and other electronic devices that shorten attention span. They will not want to sit for 3+ hours of commercials for short bursts of seeing a sport.
3. use social media to a much greater degree than the current viewers of sporting events on TV, taking time away from watching sports.
4. are attending football and other live sporting events at a declining level. This is happening at many schools. One source of the future viewing audience is losing interest.

In conclusion, at some future time, maybe 10 or 15 years from now, the revenue for college football from TV could start to decline.

[MrMemorial]

The product is already being watered down by 70-0 powerhouse vs 1aa televised games and then there are the 4+ hour tv games between NorthEastStateTech vs SouthWestTechState with 50 "Banjo Minnow" commercials stretching it out. And the absolute "makes no geographic sense at all" matchups between New Mexico State and Syracuse. And the late season Tuesday night MAC games of the week usually played in November in the upper reaches of the Michigan peninsula in 15 degree weather that makes even the tv viewers in their warm living rooms feel like they are getting frostbite.

[vujoe]

There will be no cable, just streaming channels. Maybe SEC streaming?

[bornadore57]

I have recently thought how ironic it is that as Vandy seems to trending toward being "all-in" with its football program, the landscape of college football is such that "all-in" may not even matter. On the other hand, what does "all-in" even look like anymore? With NIL, consolidation, ease of transfer, and increasing cost of fielding a team, where are we headed? What is stopping a group of college teams from just becoming minor league football teams named Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Auburn, and...? At that point, do the colleges go back to having only club programs?

I'm from a simpler time - when a family could afford to go to a game; when there was maybe one game per week on tv (and highlights of Notre Dame on Sunday morning); when a player went to the same school for four years; when Vandy was virtually the only "game" in town; when ESPN reported on the games; and when college students enjoyed going to the game. Who would have ever predicted where we are? How can anyone know where we are headed?

[charlestonalum]

Auric with so much change not only is it impossible to think about the future, it is a waste of time.
In the distant future, football may be remembered as a barbaric sport like gladiators in the colliseums in the really good old days.

[FayetteDore]

A very thoughtful question and set of scenarios, Auric.

I am the least qualified of anyone on this board to speculate on where things are headed. But if the trend toward big super conferences comprised of super powers, NIL gone wild (see link below), an ever expanding college playoff (taking more time away from class for student athletes), a 9th SEC game against tougher opponents (potentially hurting W-L records), potential faculty backlash against all this, increasing student and alumni apathy toward American football, Vanderbilt Stadium (and similar stadiums elsewhere) increasingly being totally dominated by opposing fans, etc, etc etc, I could see conversations among "like-minded schools" about leaving the rat race and forming something more to their liking. (Hello Magnolia League, or something more national.)

NIL has been in existence for a few months and we're already seeing this: https://sports.yahoo.com/will-americas- ... 03437.html. Will America's No. 1 QB recruit Quinn Ewers give up 7-figure NIL offers for one more season of Texas high school football?

[TnValleyDore]

A few thoughts in no particular order:

While I don’t see it happening, I’m in the minority that would welcome a move to the ACC if the opportunity arose. Baseball is almost as good, basketball is better, and we could compete better in football. Heck, if we were in the ACC, we might still have a men’s soccer team. The money would be less but…

2) NIL and a SEC secession from the NCAA might eventually make a Magnolia League a reality. I don’t know about Sewanee, but having FCS schools like RIchmond, Furman, Elon, etc join Tulane, Wake, Rice, and maybe VU and Duke might not be so far fetched as a middle spot between minor league football and D3.

3) It’s done, but I really don’t want Texas and OU in the SEC. The conference will be just too damn top heavy. Bring in Kansas and OK St. or Va Tech & NC St. and expand the eyeballs without creating a murderer’s row.

[BrentVU]

I'll play. As a fan, I hope Vanderbilt will always be a part of college football and compete at the highest level; heck, there's a 131-year tradition behind it! Vandy is a charter member of the nation's premier conference, and to almost all of us (except maybe magnolialeague), it would be folly to ever give that up. You'd never get it back. Vanderbilt is in much better shape than a Baylor, a Rice, a BYU, or even a Stanford. The addition of OU and Texas to the SEC doesn't threaten Vandy's seat at the big boys' table; it makes it more secure.

But the other side of that is, the product is changing in ways that are somewhat antithetical to what Vandy stands for. Right now you've got a Chancellor who's all in with athletics and a board that supports him. You've got a big commitment to facilities. But will it always be that way? Will the next Chancellor be the anti-Diermeier? Could there ever be a faculty revolt against some of the mercenary tendencies and excesses of the sport? Of course there could. Stuff changes.

So the question is, will Vanderbilt roll with these momentous changes that are on the horizon?

[Mrcommodore]

The superior entertainment value of college baseball over professional baseball, and of my son's high school soccer games over MLS games, proves that you shouldn't always pursue the "highest level." College football has benefitted from the idea that these kids have an authentic tie to their school that goes beyond the sport itself. The SEC slogan - it just means more - plays right on this idea.

As NIL shatters that illusion I think fanship will decrease proportionally. There is probably a fancy economics term for when the very economic forces that make something a success ends up decimating the entire enterprise and rendering it valueless. The teams are becoming the minor leagues of the NFL - and can anyone tell me who won the minor league world series last year?

[Johnmn555]

Five years from now, can Vandy really play in a league where basically all of the opponents' players are getting some sort of cash and the stars are raking in millions while Vandy's players just get a scholarship?

We don't have the boosters to funnel significant cash to the players through NIL, the school would look askance at it anyway, and the school would also not directly pay players when that starts happening.

Something's got to break eventually under those circumstances. We can go 0-9 in the conference every year and have our program paid for, but can that continue indefinitely?

The powers don't have to pull out of the SEC to join a super conference. With TX and OK, it already will be a super conference.

[BrentVU]

One day soon we may look back on the "good ol' days" when the only way for an SEC student-athlete to get a payment was to shake hands with an alumnus.

[MikenNashville]

Auric,
I agree with you that Vanderbilt won’t directly be asked to leave the SEC but I could see the scenario you laid out about other SEC members voting to change the revenue sharing metric, specifically the football factories who could want a super football conference above and beyond the SEC. At that point I wonder if Vanderbilt would stay a member in the SEC in all sports except football since they, as of now, are still run by the NCAA (CWS in Omaha, March Madness etc.) Power 5 football which for all intents and purposes is already autonomous from the NCAA. In this instance I could see colleges either dropping down a level in football or forming a football-only coalition of teams left out of the “premier league.”

I think if a true pay-for-play system is adopted that will change the landscape much more with not only schools such as VU, Wake, Duke, but others with larger fanbases that have much less money such as the Mississippi schools who will likely be forced out of the elite level by the economics of maintaining a minor league NFL team. At this point I’m still doubtful that true pay-for-play because of the cost or that the SEC would leave the NCAA altogether, there is still a lot of money on the table from the NCAA for Kentucky basketball, Vanderbilt and LSU baseball, even women’s basketball would go from probably close to breaking even at some schools that make the NCAA tourney to huge money pits.

One of the other big challenges as some have mentioned is the changing demographics. Some of the millennials I know watch NFL (I’ve wondered if this is mainly because of fantasy football) but don’t pay much attention to college football, one guy I know was a starter at a group of 5 school, he told me he hasn’t watched his Alma mater play since he graduated over decade ago he said he only watches a college game or two on TV around the Thanksgiving weekend with family, some bowl games and the championship game. I think you’re seeing declining interest across the board for most group of 5 teams not to mention FCS. There probably is enough interest from Boomers and Gen X to maintain power 5 level football for awhile but for how long who knows.

[UltimateVUFan]

There is probably a fancy economics term for when the very economic forces that make something a success ends up decimating the entire enterprise and rendering it valueless.

cryptocurrency ???

[vandy05]

Auric,
I agree with you that Vanderbilt won’t directly be asked to leave the SEC but I could see the scenario you laid out about other SEC members voting to change the revenue sharing metric, specifically the football factories who could want a super football conference above and beyond the SEC. At that point I wonder if Vanderbilt would stay a member in the SEC in all sports except football since they, as of now, are still run by the NCAA (CWS in Omaha, March Madness etc.) Power 5 football which for all intents and purposes is already autonomous from the NCAA. In this instance I could see colleges either dropping down a level in football or forming a football-only coalition of teams left out of the “premier league.”

I think if a true pay-for-play system is adopted that will change the landscape much more with not only schools such as VU, Wake, Duke, but others with larger fanbases that have much less money such as the Mississippi schools who will likely be forced out of the elite level by the economics of maintaining a minor league NFL team. At this point I’m still doubtful that true pay-for-play because of the cost or that the SEC would leave the NCAA altogether, there is still a lot of money on the table from the NCAA for Kentucky basketball, Vanderbilt and LSU baseball, even women’s basketball would go from probably close to breaking even at some schools that make the NCAA tourney to huge money pits.

One of the other big challenges as some have mentioned is the changing demographics. Some of the millennials I know watch NFL (I’ve wondered if this is mainly because of fantasy football) but don’t pay much attention to college football, one guy I know was a starter at a group of 5 school, he told me he hasn’t watched his Alma mater play since he graduated over decade ago he said he only watches a college game or two on TV around the Thanksgiving weekend with family, some bowl games and the championship game. I think you’re seeing declining interest across the board for most group of 5 teams not to mention FCS. There probably is enough interest from Boomers and Gen X to maintain power 5 level football for awhile but for how long who knows.

I have to add my two cents on your points about the sports outside of football and how the money could still keep schools tied to the NCAA. I have read that there is nothing contractually that requires schools to play in the NCAA tournament. The NCAA makes a lot of money, foots the bill for the expenses and then dispenses a share to the schools. What if the schools just cut the NCAA out of the game completely? What if they cut out the automatic qualifier schools and schools like Butler and Gonzaga that also get a cut of the revenue?

Suppose you had four super conferences with 16 teams? Wouldn't you know, that would create a 64 team tournament right there. You could create cross-conference matchups and pair 1 seeds (conference winners) with 16 seeds (conference last place finishers). This year you would've gotten rid of Baylor vs. Hartford and replace it with Baylor vs. Vanderbilt. You play the regular season to get a good draw in the tournament, but the big boys mix it up and determine their champion. We might've gotten our fannies kicked, but I think Baylor vs. Vandy draws better than Baylor vs. Hartford.

They would have to be careful because that kind of scenario could diminish the product and interest. You'd be left without Gonzaga, Georgetown, Butler, probably UConn. But the money that would be "reclaimed" from the mid-major schools could make it worth it to the big boys. And you could even run the women's tournament right along side it and try to pair teams up so that a fan base could travel to one location and see both of their teams play.

Something similar could be done for the CWS. The big schools don't need the NCAA to run these types of things anymore. They're more than capable of handling it on their own. Perhaps the NCAA is needed for other things, but they made themselves irrelevant by focusing on the wrong things (and getting so many things wrong) for so many years. While they were asleep at the wheel, they should've been trying to be in the driver's seat for negotiating TV contracts and helping schools boost attendance. Now they've become worthless and most schools see them as a hindrance and definitely not a help. I would not be shocked to see the above scenario come about. I'm sure it has already been talked about.

[MikenNashville]

"...the NCAA is needed for other things, but they made themselves irrelevant by focusing on the wrong things (and getting so many things wrong) for so many years. While they were asleep at the wheel, they should've been trying to be in the driver's seat for negotiating TV contracts and helping schools boost attendance. Now they've become worthless and most schools see them as a hindrance and definitely not a help...."

What he said

[AuricGoldfinger]

I do think we are close to the point where the NCAA will be out of the bigtime college football business altogether (but not of its own choosing). They've always been one-foot-in, one-foot-out anyway--they're asked to perform an enforcement role for the sport (but there's no football "czar"), and television contracts, bowls, and playoffs are largely outside of their purview.

That will set the stage for other sports at the highest collegiate levels to "break away" from the NCAA and form sport-specific unions for self-governance. Recent stories like the mismanagement of the women's basketball tournament and the softball college world series, and the botching of the television contract for the men's tournament (https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/ncaa-pr ... 48011.html) only exacerbate the potential split for other sports.

The organization may continue to exist in some reduced capacity--serving as a management organization for the lower rungs of collegiate sports, or (ironically) policing Title IX equity issues across the collegiate landscape. But I think its days as the umbrella entity governing almost all college sports will come to an end.