Cody Campbell op-ed

[THookem]

 

[JMarquette]

9 minutes ago, THookem said:

 

“College sports is broken because of rich people, so to fix it, I will pay a softball player $1,000,000 a year, and pay a left tackle who can’t block $750,000 per year”

[Bunk Moreland]

“A flagrant power grab by the most powerful names and entities in college sports”

does this dude have any self-awareness whatsoever, or is he really just that brazenly cynical?

[Bunk Moreland]

“College athletics are a public trust” “college sports has never been a private fiefdom”

*proceeds to pump millions of private dollars into his own little fiefdom*

[Bunk Moreland]

“Universities claim they have to follow the money out of self-preservation but their decisions are creating a financial monopoly”

*proceeds to follow the money to buy all the best recruits, thereby creating at Tech something approaching a financial monopoly*

[Bunk Moreland]

Interesting that he spends so much time appealing to patriotism, the constitution, the importance of college athletics as a fundamentally American institution and then proceeds to describe college sports as a public good that should be effectively owned by the state. And his solution is collectivized pooling of media rights. I’m not commenting on the legitimacy of his proposed solution (which is stupid), but the hypocrisy is just stunning. College sports is a business that generates billions of dollars in revenues. To suggest that it is a public good is one of the most bizarre things I think I’ve ever seen someone posit on X, and that is saying something.

Edited Sunday at 10:54 PM by Bunk Moreland

[JMarquette]

2 hours ago, Bunk Moreland said:

Interesting that he spends so much time appealing to patriotism, the constitution, the importance of college athletics as a fundamentally American institution and then proceeds to describe college sports as a public good that should be effectively owned by the state. And his solution is collectivized pooling of media rights. I’m not commenting on the legitimacy of his proposed solution (which is stupid), but the hypocrisy is just stunning. College sports is a business that generates billions of dollars in revenues. To suggest that it is a public good is one of the most bizarre things I think I’ve ever seen someone posit on X, and that is saying something.

Bingo - everyone wants the state out of their business UNLESS it personally benefits them. 

[MBHORNSFAN]

Cody Campbell sucks. 

[General Grant]

I want Texas to share media rights revenue with my school that no one gives a crap about. 

[Jordan91]

He’s part of the problem. 

[.45s]

There is something about him I don't like or trust.

[Burnt Orange Horn]

3 hours ago, MBHORNSFAN said:

Cody Campbell sucks. 

Dead bears!!

🤘🏻🤘🏼🤘🤘🏽🤘🏾🤘🏿

Edited yesterday at 05:18 AM by Burnt Orange Horn

[Leveller]

This is 100% a ploy to allow Texas Tech get the same media payout as Alabama, when Alabama generates 4 times the viewership. And if the media payout is going to be equal for every school then why should football and basketball be the main recipients of revenue sharing? I’m sure that isn’t something Campbell wants to change. The justification now is because they generate the media revenue.  Well…. Don’t the conferences that generate the most in media revenue deserve more of the pie?  

[SueVide]

21 hours ago, JMarquette said:

“College sports is broken because of rich people, so to fix it, I will pay a softball player $1,000,000 a year, and pay a left tackle who can’t block $750,000 per year”

 I didn't even read the article and this was my exact thought on what he said. "I am the problem but I won't stop doing what I'm doing."

[liveattheoasis]

"I can't fund Texas Tech forever"

[Steamboat Willie]

Calling college sports a “public asset” that Congress needs to manage just doesn’t make sense. This isn’t taxpayer-funded, it’s schools competing in a market that’s finally showing what things are actually worth. Yeah, it’s messy right now, but that’s what happens when you take away years of artificial limits. Making it a federal issue just brings in politics and slows everything down.

The real point isn’t being said out loud. This is about pushing back on SEC and Big Ten dominance and trying to even out the money. If Texas Tech were in the SEC or Big Ten with those same payouts, this argument probably never gets made. That’s the tell. It’s less about protecting the system and more about where your program stands in it. Those leagues are ahead because that’s where the demand is. You don’t fix that by forcing balance from the top down, you just protect teams that can’t keep up. Let it play out, clean up the rules, and it’ll settle on its own.

[Glass Joe]

I wonder if someone made the claim that all oil and gas minerals are a public good, should be protected / regulated for the greater good of the general public, and collectively pooled to determine the price, what would Cody’s response be?

[ArizonaLonghorn]

1 hour ago, Glass Joe said:

I wonder if someone made the claim that all oil and gas minerals are a public good, should be protected / regulated for the greater good of the general public, and collectively pooled to determine the price, what would Cody’s response be?

"COMMUNISM !!!"

[horns96]

2 hours ago, Glass Joe said:

I wonder if someone made the claim that all oil and gas minerals are a public good, should be protected / regulated for the greater good of the general public, and collectively pooled to determine the price, what would Cody’s response be?

...and that would be a much more defensible argument than the one Cody Campbell is making for college sports.

[mi16z]

He's such pre-Madonna.

[Oldest Horn]

If you ever wondered what’s best for Texas, just take the opposite stance as Cody Campbell. 

[Steamboat Willie]

16 hours ago, horns96 said:

...and that would be a much more defensible argument than the one Cody Campbell is making for college sports.

If you pooled oil revenues, you’d be redistributing from the most productive fields to the least. That’s basically what’s being hinted at here with college sports. It sounds like “fairness,” but it’s really about shifting resources based on where you sit, not how much demand you generate.

And that’s the part people don’t want to say out loud. This isn’t really about protecting college sports, it’s about pushing back on who’s winning right now. Same idea, different industry. But just like with energy, once you start forcing redistribution instead of letting production and demand drive outcomes, you don’t fix the system, you distort it.

[Inspired73]

16 minutes ago, Steamboat Willie said:

... It sounds like “fairness,” but it’s really about shifting resources based on where you sit, not how much demand you generate.

This isn’t really about protecting college sports, it’s about pushing back on who’s winning right now.. . .

CC's approach has been interesting.  What he really wants is for Tech to sit at the Adult's Table in the main dining room.  He didn't get an invite with his checkbook, so now he trying to create a volume component with his 'share the pie' rant.  I do not really think he wants to share the pie.  He just wants a piece of the pie and a seat at the big table.... and he needs help.

The interesting thing regarding this movement is that there appears to be a very limited number of like-minded schools that are genuinely eager to change dining rooms.  The overwhelming number of schools simply want extracurricular sports but at a reasonable cost.  

The real question is going to be, "what are the parameters of the adult dining room?"

PS: I am not disagreeing with Steamboat.  this is really an addition to

 

[jkates]

I don't trust Cody Campbell.

[Steamboat Willie]

1 hour ago, Inspired73 said:

CC's approach has been interesting.  What he really wants is for Tech to sit at the Adult's Table in the main dining room.  He didn't get an invite with his checkbook, so now he trying to create a volume component with his 'share the pie' rant.  I do not really think he wants to share the pie.  He just wants a piece of the pie and a seat at the big table.... and he needs help.

The interesting thing regarding this movement is that there appears to be a very limited number of like-minded schools that are genuinely eager to change dining rooms.  The overwhelming number of schools simply want extracurricular sports but at a reasonable cost.  

The real question is going to be, "what are the parameters of the adult dining room?"

PS: I am not disagreeing with Steamboat.  this is really an addition to

 

What CC is really pushing for isn’t some neutral “fix the system” framework, it’s access. A seat at the table where the biggest decisions and money flows are already concentrated. And like you said, if that access doesn’t come naturally through performance, brand, or market pull, then the next lever is trying to reshape how the pie gets divided. That’s where the “fairness” language starts doing a lot of work.

The other point you make is just as important. Most schools aren’t trying to move into that top tier, they’re trying to manage costs and stay competitive at a sustainable level. So you end up with two very different incentives in the same system. A small group pushing to redefine the top tier and how it’s structured, and a much larger group that’s fine staying out of it. That’s why this whole thing feels less like a system-wide solution and more like a targeted push by a few programs trying to change where they sit in the hierarchy.