08-30-2013, 08:13 AM
I'm coming in a bit late to this thread. But it seems like there's a very strong case to be made for some cap on spending on stuff like this. I wouldn't cap donations -- it's not clear that would be legal, and the problem is the spending, not the donations. But what purpose is served by having facilities like this?Â
It's clearly in Oregon's best interest to build this facility, because it helps them win recruiting battles against schools with less luxurious facilities. But the result is an arms race among the wealthier schools: you need to outdo your competitors. Put a cap on that spending, and every school would save money. The football games would be just as good (other than helping win recruiting battles, a facility like this won't lead to better football). And if a cap would mean more competitive balance (which I'm not sure it would, but it might), that could make college football better. But the big point would be to save every school money.
Of course, writing the rules and enforcing them would be tough. But the NCAA already has plenty of rules that are much harder to write and enforce than this would be.
It's clearly in Oregon's best interest to build this facility, because it helps them win recruiting battles against schools with less luxurious facilities. But the result is an arms race among the wealthier schools: you need to outdo your competitors. Put a cap on that spending, and every school would save money. The football games would be just as good (other than helping win recruiting battles, a facility like this won't lead to better football). And if a cap would mean more competitive balance (which I'm not sure it would, but it might), that could make college football better. But the big point would be to save every school money.
Of course, writing the rules and enforcing them would be tough. But the NCAA already has plenty of rules that are much harder to write and enforce than this would be.