[OutsiderFan]

Finebaum says that college football is over...

Paul Finebaum's warning: 'College football is headed for a cliff' (msn.com)

Though future events may prove him correct, Finebaum's words do not paint the picture of College Football dying as much as consolidating. Pardon me if I don't consider the sport dying until Alabama vs. Georgia doesn't sell out the stadium or get big ratings on TV.

The more accurate reality is there has been a continual winnowing of the programs that can compete at the highest level of the sport. Just a decade ago, if there was a CFP, Stanford would have been in it. I would be shocked if anyone reading this thinks Stanford will ever be at that level in football again. Just 18 years ago, Cal was 9 yards from being #1 in the country. Cal is never getting back to that level again either. Go back even 40 year ago, SMU was #1. Though the "death penalty" probably set it back as much as the constant drive for more money that killed the Southwest Conference and set the dominoes falling to where we are today, SMU also is never getting back to that level again, not with Texas and Texas A&M in the SEC.

Simply stated, the best players will mostly go where the best competition is, and the competition for those players will lead to them getting paid. It's just basic market Darwinism in a capitalist economy. Cal and Stanford made a choice to not emphasize big time College Football, but were benefitting from being in that market. Now the market doesn't want them. They can choose to be in it or out of it, but they can no longer play both sides of the fence. They have to make a choice, do we want to be a part of this market, or do we not? To be a part of it means emphasizing football and prioritizing it. Not being a part of it means dropping the sport or going to a lower level that will cut off the money that comes with football.

So many people on this board love the sports other than football and hoops that are dependent on revenue from football and hoops, and operate on the idea Stanford should pay for those sports on its own, without football "blood money." If Stanford can get donors to pony up the money, that's great, but the reality is that isn't likely to happen. What is most likely to happen without football, is Stanford sports will no longer be competitive because the money won't be available to fund elite programs. How many people here would care about Stanford sports to anything close to what they do now if Stanford teams were never competing for championships? And can you say you'd rather not have Stanford sports to root for so football isn't professionalized?

College Football has always been a Faustian Bargain, but look around at the world you live in. Humans make these bargains all the time in countless aspects of our lives. It's who we are.

[OutsiderFan]

Finebaum says that college football is over...

Paul Finebaum's warning: 'College football is headed for a cliff' (msn.com)

Though future events may prove him correct, Finebaum's words do not paint the picture of College Football dying as much as consolidating. Pardon me if I don't consider the sport dying until Alabama vs. Georgia doesn't sell out the stadium or get big ratings on TV.

The more accurate reality is there has been a continual winnowing of the programs that can compete at the highest level of the sport. Just a decade ago, if there was a CFP, Stanford would have been in it. I would be shocked if anyone reading this thinks Stanford will ever be at that level in football again. Just 18 years ago, Cal was 9 yards from being #1 in the country. Cal is never getting back to that level again either. Go back even 40 year ago, SMU was #1. Though the "death penalty" probably set it back as much as the constant drive for more money that killed the Southwest Conference and set the dominoes falling to where we are today, SMU also is never getting back to that level again, not with Texas and Texas A&M in the SEC.

Simply stated, the best players will mostly go where the best competition is, and the competition for those players will lead to them getting paid. It's just basic market Darwinism in a capitalist economy. Cal and Stanford made a choice to not emphasize big time College Football, but were benefitting from being in that market. Now the market doesn't want them. They can choose to be in it or out of it, but they can no longer play both sides of the fence. They have to make a choice, do we want to be a part of this market, or do we not? To be a part of it means emphasizing football and prioritizing it. Not being a part of it means dropping the sport or going to a lower level that will cut off the money that comes with football.

So many people on this board love the sports other than football and hoops that are dependent on revenue from football and hoops, and operate on the idea Stanford should pay for those sports on its own, without football "blood money." If Stanford can get donors to pony up the money, that's great, but the reality is that isn't likely to happen. What is most likely to happen without football, is Stanford sports will no longer be competitive because the money won't be available to fund elite programs. How many people here would care about Stanford sports to anything close to what they do now if Stanford teams were never competing for championships? And can you say you'd rather not have Stanford sports to root for so football isn't professionalized?

College Football has always been a Faustian Bargain, but look around at the world you live in. Humans make these bargains all the time in countless aspects of our lives. It's who we are.