Chip Patterson, Cover Three Podcast moderator, CVSSports.com, college football, college basketball, golf commentator, all of that. How are you, sir?
I'm doing fantastic. You know, I put in a special request to the excellent Victoria. I said, not just any March Madness-themed song, but the one with the big pick scrape. And if you know a pick scrape when you hear one, there is no more iconic pick scrape than Eel Bang. And so to be able to pull that one up, that is the OG, at least in my heart.
So thank you to Victoria for getting me set and getting me fired up for this chat. I am significantly older than you, but I remember a time when the NCAA tournament was not on in full on Thursday and Friday afternoons. This is long before we had a first four on Tuesdays and Wednesday nights. So it used to be that on Thursday, the first Thursday of the tournament, CBS would come on with like an 11 o'clock game or an 1130 game from Ogden, Utah, or from Missoula, Montana, or Boise, Idaho. And usually it would be an 8-9 game or a 7-10, something like that. Something where the matchup was probably going to be close. And I remember staying up and waiting for it.
And that was an absolute thrill. We had all the results already in for all the other games, but we had a game. And now, of course, the tournament started last week, I think. And next year, or however, when are we going to get to 90? I believe the move towards 90 is more philosophical than real. I mean, I don't know if we're talking about NCAA tournament expansion right now, but there's the side that is exploring it and wanting to be more open and the philosophical debate going on within those athletic directors, university presidents, and the like. But then there's also the business side of things and the current deal still has some time on it. And so I would not expect any kind of expansion before the end of the current deal, because when it comes to the NCAA and finances, Adam, that contract's pretty important. So I don't think that we're going to be ripping it up anytime soon.
No, no, I 100% agree. All right, let's talk about Nick Saban and the interview he gave to Ross Dellinger of SI, in which we could tell you there's a lot of things in there, but primarily the one that's getting the most traction is it's clear that Nick Saban, he says he has no problem with NIL, and I believe him on that. He clearly has a problem with collectives.
I wonder, I mean, what are your thoughts on what overall, what he had to say, and then we'll go from there. He also, uh, he sounds like he's getting soft in his old age. He also said he didn't want to have to play, uh, Auburn, Tennessee and LSU, a combination of 38 and 11 against as Alabama's head coach. You know, that 7 75 win percentage still feels like you're losing a bunch when you're 8 75 over your career with the Crimson Tide marinate.
His win percentage is 8 75. But to the more like professionalization of college sports, he says he wants to go to an NFL model. He would like to lessen what is becoming a growing amount of power within powerful individuals and groups of powerful individuals who have a lot of money to throw around and a lot of care about their football program. And Alabama is unique compared to all 133 FBS schools. Alabama is unique, even among the power five conferences. I would put Alabama on a list of 10, maybe 12, uh, big time college football universities where the power in terms of the money and the resources that can be turned on or turned off at the discretion of some of these boosters and power players is is really unique. And at times like people say Nick Saban's the most powerful person in Alabama. But there's also the reminder that the there's an entire bank built out of the Bear Bryant dynasty and that entire bank is filled with money and lots of money that can be turned on and turned off. So I see Nick Saban, a control freak, seeing more control being handed to people that are not coaches and people that are not tied to the program directly.
And as those resources are allocated, I think he knows that there will be a sense of ownership. It's actually one piece of NIL that's always made me feel a little bit icky is the backslapping in the, you know, the big time booster suites where I paid for that guy. That doesn't make me feel good. No, but I think Nick Saban probably feels the same and doesn't like the growing power the boosters have. Yeah. The truth is, is that the we had that booster before.
Now that booster is doing it without having to get a burner phone. Right. He's just just he's just part of the collective. So I'm curious, could we ban could collectives be banned? They could be unnecessary. Yes.
Yes. They could be banned. They won't be banned, but they could be made unnecessary if we change the.
Why won't they be banned? Because the there is always going to be a hunger for more money by every avenue that you can get within college athletics. And so you're not going to.
You might change their name. You might tell them that they can give elsewhere, but you're not going to say no to someone's money. If you if you're right now here in twenty twenty three, if you are a university or an athletic department, you are not saying no to any one's money. Right.
Anybody comes with money, you're going to be willing to take it. I think if they banned collectives, those collectives would just they would say, all right, we're we're shut down. But they would continue to operate in some way, shape or form, like in an obscurity. That's the way I look at it. Here's here's what I am. I am curious. We we do this with elementary school kids in math.
Show your work. Why can't the collectives why can't the the monies that are promised? Why can't they do that in just simply in exchange for work, not in exchange for the promise of work, but in exchange for actual work? Why? I mean, there has to be if we're afraid that it's going to be a recruiting inducement.
And I understood that from the beginning. The NCAA, they don't do a lot of things right. I'm not even sure this is correct, but the NCAA said right off the hop, we don't want NIL money to be used as a recruiting inducement. And I said right away that there's no way it won't be.
Just like it is now without it being, you know, just like it was then without it being legal. But could they make you show your work? No, I don't think so. I think that the way these collectives are set up, like being able to obtain these contracts has been very difficult. The Jaden Rashada contract was obtained thanks to Andy Staples, I think he was. That was my avenue to first seen a lot of the details from the Jaden Rashada contract. And he's I mean, he went to Florida and he's a Florida guy. The fact that he would be able to have those connections to the Gator Collective and and be able to get his hands on that paperwork. It it makes sense to me. We haven't seen a lot of these contracts.
And so the the fact that there's no regulation across the board, I don't think that anybody has to show their work until we have oversight and there's just not simply any oversight. It's sticking your head in the sand to think that a recruiting inducement is not going to be implicit. I mean, it's implicit in that, hey, come to this school, because this school is where all the like players are getting paid a whole bunch of money.
When there was a video, it's very, very dumb. But so a player, I don't know if you heard about Texas A&M, a player was on a tour with an assistant coach. They walked into the middle of the football field, you know, out of the tunnel, envisioned this place filled up. And the assistant coach looks up and he points to, you know, all the VIP boxes.
And he says, there's a lot of money up there and they're going to be waiting to give it to you. You know, all you got to do is just be able to come and commit. And like that is an explicit recruiting inducement. But there's ways that you could be a little less like blatant about it. So to think that it's not going to play a role in where a high profile college football or even college basketball player decides to take their talents, so to speak. Then that's again, it's a real head in the sand stuff. It's always going to be a factor there.
Like it's always been a wink and a nod. Now, I think you just see more evidence of the money that is going to the players that are already on the team. Chip Patterson, CBSSports.com cover three podcast moderator joining us here in the Adam Gold show. I also think it's kind of funny that Nick Saban is complaining about the players are only going where they get the most money as opposed to the place that will that is better for them. That will help them create the most value when he's sitting on, what, 15 percent of the top 100 players in this recruiting class. So he ended up with the best class, but he's still complaining about it.
And I understand it could have gotten more players. Nick Saban has told a player, I know one player, but Nick Saban has told players to kick rocks when it comes to this NIL game because look what he's got. You know, somebody came, somebody came to the table and they were asking for, I don't know if it's a whole bunch of money or more money and had a whole bunch of favors that they were demanding. And Nick Saban was like, fine, the transfer portal is right there. Go ahead. It does sound to me like he's Alabama needs a better collective.
Like Shaka Smart from Marquette. He's been telling stories to anybody who's asking about, you know, the players that are demanding the NIL money. That's as much of a red flag as a bad story from your your high school. I guess it's very interesting how this is starting to like truly be tested in practice, which is what we always said. Like I always said, I understand there will be unintended unintended consequences.
I'm not afraid of them because we'll learn from them and continue to move forward and modernize the game. And it's it's fun how it's it's cut in both ways, both with people being disgusted by a player demanding money and then the same player that's demanding money, not getting an opportunity because these coaches don't like what it says about you. I've always said, let's just let it settle.
It was the wild, wild west. I'm like, just chill out. It'll be I think everything will work out pretty well. Do you have an opinion on whether or not North Carolina, what would it say if they turned down an IT bid? It would be a very disappointing message to players like Dontrez Stiles, Demarco Dunn, some of the younger players, Wylie Nichols, some of the younger players on this team.
I think that, you know, turning that turning down an IT invitation is ridding them of the opportunity to develop and to build. I think back to John Henson's freshman season, that team went to the NIT and won a couple of games. And, you know, John talks about that being a really different he's he now is a like a he's a radio host and a commentator for the field of 68. And he talks on the air about some of the challenges of that season. But then getting through it and then playing good basketball at the end of the season, how that sparked a better 2011.
And of course, the 2012 season that where they were one of the best teams in the ACC and one of the better teams in the country prior to Kendall Marshall's injury. So I think it would be a disservice to the freshmen and sophomores on this team to turn down an IT opportunity. And it would just also say that we're above it.
You know, the NIT, the NIT doesn't deserve us. It would be hard to not spin it that way. It would be hard for it not to appear that way because it isn't about just Caleb Love. And Caleb Love actually said, I'll play in it.
I'd like to win something. I give Caleb Love a lot of credit for saying it. I get the disappointment of it all.
Right. I totally understand why the players would not be stoked to play in it. But it isn't just about the individual player.
I think the program, whether it would benefit or not, I think I just think it's what you do. I mean, Roy did, you know, incredibly disappointing season. And then not only played in it, but they took it seriously. Made it all the way to the last game. They played at Carmichael, right? Mm hmm. Gosh, I was at the William and Mary game at Carmichael.
That was one of the most incredible experiences I've had. Maybe they should play at Carmichael for that. You and I have not talked golf yet at all.
So let's get into just a little bit. And this is not about the players championship, which I have seen almost none of. Although there was a hole in one very early in realm one yesterday on the 17th. What are you what are your thoughts on the elevated events with no cut? And I believe for next year's schedule, there will be eight with between 70 and 80 players with no cut. A lot more FedEx cup points, a lot more is still 20 million dollar purses. So split among 70, 80 players.
And the notion that they're just copying the live tour. When we told growers that new bear premium tri-fold herbicide for corn delivers visibly clean fields for up to eight weeks. They were a bit skeptical. We'll see how it works.
So we decided to prove it. We set up cameras in multiple corn fields, treated them with tri-fold and filmed for 24 hours a day. For eight weeks, we saw a variety of weather conditions and tri-volt worked.
See for yourself at tri-volt in action dot com. Tri-volt is a restricted use pesticide. Consult your state pesticide regulator for specific restrictions.
Read and follow pesticide label directions. Looking for adventure in 2023? How does island hopping in Thailand sound? What about marveling at waterfalls in Iceland or top us with your new BFFs in Seville?
What about discovering the world with an awesome group of 18 to 35? Explore all of this and more with Contiki. You'll sleep in the coolest accommodation and learn from local guides and experts. Visit Contiki dot com. That's C-O-N-T-I-K-I dot com to book your next adventure. Contiki. Travel.
Together. I'm not all in on the notion that they're just copying the live tour. So I'll get the last point to sort of out of the way because that's not what has resonated with me the most. What has resonated with me the most is the conflict between I don't like it and I get it.
I don't like it. I prefer my 156 player fields. I prefer, you know, all four rounds and the cut, the rhythms of a tournament. You're getting the good draw, the bad draw.
Are you going to, you know, get faced the good wind or the bad wind? And sort of the dynamics of that have made following golf a lot of fun and created some variants and some instability that allow for some of those great stories. Those great stories are now going to be relegated to what are clearly the secondary events on the PGA Tour schedule where the carrot hung out in front of those tournaments are.
These guys can win here and then go and make it into one of these elevated events. I understand it from the business standpoint where they say our sponsors are going to be happier if they know that there's no chance Rory's going home on the weekend. That we are going to get four days of Rory McIlroy, of Jon Rahm, of Jordan Spieth, Justin Thomas. And, you know, we can commit our money knowing that there's at least going to be some interest there. I get that.
Again, I don't like it, but I get it. And then another angle of this that has been explained to me is that now a golf fan can very clearly prioritize the way that they are going to try to live their life but also follow golf passionately. That certain events are going to be the ones that you try to set aside time to watch. These other events are going to be ones you catch the last, you know, five, six holes on a Sunday and trying to make it less confusing for golf fans to know when we're on and when you can just go back to being with your family or take a nap or do some yard work. I mean, they have what, 48 events in a 52-week calendar year? That is exhausting and you cannot expect a golf fan to try to keep up with every bit of it.
So that was another thing that is interesting to me. Again, I don't like it. I like my tournaments the way I like my tournaments, but I get it in terms of what they're trying to do to continue to evolve the way the PGA Tour is presented to the fans. Here's the way I look at it. I actually, I mean, it's not that I don't dislike it.
I don't necessarily love it. I think I'm more about this is the way it probably has to be, but it's also not very different from what it used to be, except that we're kind of labeling them now. We've always had no-cut elevated events on the PGA Tour, whether it was the season-opening Tournament of Champions, whether it was the season-ending World Series of Golf and the playoff events and the World Golf Championships. We've always had them and the pro-live people who are like, oh, see, I guess it's hypocrisy. No, it isn't because it's not an entire tour built on it. It's so funny to watch the people who are so pro-live who want to go after the PGA Tour for being hypocritical. This is the PGA Tour doing exactly what they have done for decades. We've always had these events that had no cut and had limited fields and had big money poured in.
Tigers won 20 of them, right? The match play is the same thing. We don't even have, I think the match play might even be going away at some point, but we don't even have the other World Golf Championship events anymore because we have all these other events.
So to me, it was no change at all, other than we have a few more of them and that's it. It's funny to watch the, I think the PGA Tour players will benefit. I think they'll actually, they'll play in these other events and they'll actually qualify because there's more than 50 players in the top 50. Or rather, if you have a 75 player field and you're devoting spots in the top 50, there seems to be a lot more players than that that'll be in this field. So these guys are going to get in.
Just a lot of whining about nothing for me. Yeah, I'm not, again, I'm just not all in on the direct correlation. Oh, it's just a copycat move because it is larger than that. It is them drawing a line in the sand and trying to allow for the competitors themselves to divide up into the haves and the have nots. And then for fans to understand, you know, when are you watching the mid-majors and when are you watching the majors? And so that's, it's fine. It makes sense.
It makes it easier to understand. And that's what golf, I think, is looking to do. And all the best players are going to play in them. And now we can have fantasy golf and we all know who's playing.
With one of the best savings rates in America, banking with Capital One is the easiest decision in the history of decisions. Even easier than choosing Slash to be in your band. Next up for lead guitar. You're in. Cool.
Yep, even easier than that. And with no fees or minimums on checking and savings accounts, is it even a decision? That's banking reimagined. What's in your wallet? Terms apply. See Capital One dot com slash bank for details. Capital One and A-member FDIC.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-03-11 12:03:17 / 2023-03-11 12:11:49 / 9