SMU’s Larry Brown: NCAA is ‘full of bologna’

[Harry]

On how not playing in a power conference hurts SMU:

“Our conference is pretty good, we’re lucky. When you’re with Connecticut, Cincinnati, Memphis, Temple, you’re lucky. But I hate the trend. There are no rivalries anymore other than (in) football. Travel is terrible. They talk about the best interest in student-athletes, they are full of bologna. They are only interested in money. Then some of these so-called power conferences are going to be able to provide things for kids that maybe some of the lower-level schools can’t. It’s not fair.”

read more: http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/2014/08/smus-larry-brown-ncaa-is-full-of-bologna-and-only-interested-in-money.html/

[Andrew]

I'm not following he wants closer rivalries but part of the reason he opted to coach SMU was because they were joining at the time the big east.... Perhaps they should have stayed in CUSA with Houston and played the likes of UNT, Tulsa, UTEP, UTSA etc...

[UNTFan23]

I'm not following he wants closer rivalries but part of the reason he opted to coach SMU was because they were joining at the time the big east.... Perhaps they should have stayed in CUSA with Houston and played the likes of UNT, Tulsa, UTEP, UTSA etc...

We took SMU's place in CUSA so if they stayed we would have stayed in the Sun Belt.

[untjim1995]

Not necessarily. I think we would have gained admittance. They would have left out the Florida schools before us...

There is no way that would have happened. They had no Miami exposure and SMU had Tulsa, Rice, and Tulane as private backers to protect their market position. No way we would have EVER gotten into CUSA with SMU there--not a prayer of it.

SMU is just sort of stuck, just like UH, Tulane, Tulsa, and Memphis are stuck. They come from decent to huge markets, but they cannot escape the shadow of the P5 schools around them. They have to try and move upward on the conference ladder, but being higher on a ladder that doesn't get you to a landing spot is really just insanity. Now, if the AAC can stay strong in hoops, they can sort of make a niche for themselves--be the first non-power league that offers football still, while being a great hoops conference. If the NCAA Tournament stays the way it currently is, then the AAC will at least be able to provide those schools I just mentioned a lifeline in additionally strong revenue. This is where the first round of conference alignment seriously missed the boat--sure, football drives the bus, but basketball matters, too, just from the additional games the hoops provides, the TV exposure you still get, and the greatness of the tournament to provide even more PR for your school and conference. I think that is beginning to show now. Louisville, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse all end up in the basketball heavy AAC. TV markets now play the big role in who goes where. Ironically, the B1G is who got burned the most on this with Nebraska--yes, they have a national name, but they provide little market to sell for TV purposes for that B1G Network for the valuable in-state fee that they charge cable subscribers. Its a big reason that I believe that Kansas will be a very valuable commodity int he next round of realignment. They have a strong hoops program, they have a great academic standing by being a part of the AAU, and they have a large presence in Kansas and Missouri, which provides two states to get on board for extra revenue.