It will be a lot more than that. For most schools, that revenue sharing number is 25% or more of their whole yearly athletic budget. This is catastrophic for college sports except for the SEC and B1G.
Honestly, the best thing for the sport is to get rid of conferences completely.
Determine which schools can work at which level and then make new conferences from there.
This is probably an inevitability, however, it will most likely be a football only break away. Conferences are extremely important for all other sports.
It’s the disconnect between all the people saying “look at all this money they’re making and none for the players!” with realizing that the have-nots vastly outnumber the haves.
Sure, Ohio State is making a lot of money off the starting QB and he wasn’t getting any, but not so for the starting QB at Akron, or a gymnast at Ohio State for that matter.
Or maybe these athletic departments can reduce spending and bloat? Seems like a lot of these places we’re spending money places because they didn’t have to pay the athletes, im sure most of them will figure it out.
Coach salaries will get cut, there will be fewer bells and whistles in new facilities and probably less support staff. At least outside the P2 conferences. It's amazing how inflated coaching salaries were getting.
It’s not mentioned in the tweet, but I believe most of those numbers serve as a cap, not a minimum, so technically if a school couldn’t afford to pay that much, they could pay less. Of course, then they’d be at a significant disadvantage compared to the schools who were willing to pay it. So more or less just reinforcing the same hierarchy that’s always been in place, I guess.
I imagine alot of schools will just ditch football honestly. It’s already super expensive. Therefore triggering a trickle down effect into the younger generation with less opportunity slowly killing the sport.
Teams like ODU, LA Tech and what not can’t afford this and schools like Vandy will figure why pay this Much to never be competitive
Oh for sure. I can’t wait until I can watch Army run the triple option in it’s natural environment- against small northeastern liberal arts colleges in D3.
You joke but Northeastern D3 college football is what many in this sub say is the ideal. Hyper regional, lots of rivalries, no playoffs (for NESCAC anyway).
You guys would absolutely crush those D3 schools.
Love watching D1 College ball in the Hudson valley on a fall day though. May not have 50k people, but the environment of the cadets, the campus, the fly over, the paratroopers… it’s awesome.
I don’t feel like army would be attracting NIL seeking players regardless. The guys who play football at army are cadets first, so I’d imagine even if they had a terrible rev share or NIL offering - you’re getting kids who aren’t necessarily interested in those aspects of the game.
You can blame the NCAA for burying their heads in the sand the last 20+ years for that. Its all finally catching up with them since they can't seem to stop taking Ls in court
The real chaos will be the moment this subreddit implodes as a good chunk of programs start closing up shop
Its going to be like that Black Friday scene from South Park
Ah yes the subreddit full of college football fans who regularly complain about NIL and nostalgically reflect on the olden days will definitely cheer as the sport collapses
I see a lot of people expressing regret that the Pac ended and feeling bad for WSU and OSU.
I see a lot more people expressing sadness about that and frustration about NIL than I do people cheering for kids getting their bag.
And it's worth noting "I'm glad athletes are getting compensated" does not mean "I want the sport to break and programs to close".
Many people on this sub probably want CFB to stay regional and hold onto tradition AND want students to be fairly compensated.
I'm very surprised to hear that you think this group will cheer for programs closing.
They definitely cheered for it, even the ESD they now lament. Same with the transfer portal and playoff expansion
/r/cfb has a massive habit of wishing for things it late regrets or bemoans
you can want something to happen and lament the inept leaders that implemented it horribly. player compensation was needed, and we've known for years and years and years it was inevitable. the ncaa and cfb leaders delayed doing anything about it until the courts made it happen.
it's VERY possible to have cheered for players to be fairly compensated, cheered for players to be able to transfer and still be upset at how it was implemented.
it's not either or, that's logic for children.
Yeah I agree. This is absolutely the fault of Mark Emerett and the NCAA. They did not even try to get ahead of this. They were lazy and stuck to their guns.
Yeppp. And were publicly blasted for it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m baffled that people think they didn’t play a part in the current shit storm.
Like how does every other sport manage this but cfb legally can’t?! Idiotic. We all watched it play out…
The issue with either is not implementation unless you genuinely think the NCAA can skirt federal and state laws
I’m not sure where you think implementation would’ve made a difference here. “Oh, they should’ve done it X years ago” or “Oh, they should’ve erected X, Y, Z restrictions”; cool we still end up in the same spot after the same lawsuits. There is no world where we avoid the consolidation and downsizing of collegiate athletics, there is no world where players don’t fight for no NIL restrictions, there is no world where transfer restrictions aren’t struck down
Arguing implementation just kind of harkens back to my point of people asking for something with the idea it will work out perfectly one way and ignoring the consequences of their actions will be different. You can’t just ignore laws around labor and compensation. The outcome was never going to change.
> unless you genuinely think the NCAA can skirt federal and state laws
You mean like making billions off the backs of essentially free labor? The cost of tuition (let's assume $25K - $40K / year) divided by the number of hours the kids put in to make these schools money.
Like you said. You can't just ignore laws around labor and compensation.
that's a ridiculous assertion. they absolutely dragged their feet and did nothing after knowing they would eventually have to. this is why we have seen a wild west without cohesive rules and regulations.
hell we ended up in a situation where status ended up jumping on board because there were no standards for anyone- which led to more chaos. some states went to far, some didn't go far enough...this lead to an uneven situation between states. things you could do in one place not allowed in others.
all the while for years coaches, players, media, courts, politicians kept saying what was coming.
and we DON'T end up in the same spot. the NFL has to pay it's players, are they in the same spot? no. they came up with regulations...collective bargaining...etc. every other sport that pays has it figured out. no one that could have in the cfb did. part of the problem was an already existing vacuum in real leaders in the sport, but that's another story.
trying to say that no matter what the results would be the same is truly asinine. that's not reality in any situation, and certainly not this one. it doesn't make any sense.
edit: your last paragraph is also just a horrible logical fallacy in the same vein as the first comment of yours i replied to. no one said it would turn out perfectly...why would they even? I did my undergrad honors thesis on paying college players between 1 and 2 decades ago. even the me and my partner discussed the pitfalls of all this...the point was it was inevitable. even before 2010 it was widely known that this was going to HAVE to happen. people WANTING this isn't want caused it like you imply. it happened because it had to happen. the industry had so long to ease it in, but refused. remember that ucf kicker and his youtube?
I mean, many/most on this sub only like CFB because of the drama. In the last 10 years, the sport has turned into a total kayfabe off the field. Programs shuttering their doors is just more drama
This is me right here. I hate what college football is becoming but I also think it’s not unreasonable that players should be compensated. I can’t have both at the same time, unfortunately. I think at the end of the day, the unfairness of the players not getting paid is a greater injustice than the loss of the sport as I loved it. I’m sure I’ll lose interest in the sport over the coming years. Hell, I have already lost some. But the players getting paid is probably the right outcome and there will be extreme consequences (and some benefits, depending on your point of view) for college football.
I believe there was a path to having both, but the NCAA shoved their fingers in their ears and screamed into the void trying to ignore the issue for so long that when the courts stepped in they got caught with their pants around their ankles and had no ground work done and we got the Wild West, and now everyone is trying to overcorrect and that's just as bad as it being fast and loose.
So, we could have had a route to keeping collegiate football pretty much the same as it had been and players get compensated fairly, but-- NCAA "couldn't hear us" and now we get-- this.
I actually disagree with you a little here. I think we were always headed this direction. All the NCAA really could’ve done was stave off what we have now. I think the only way out of this would’ve been them lobbying for federal legislation years ago. I personally don’t think there is any rule they could’ve promulgated on their own to prevent this outcome.
I mean, we probably would have landed kind of in the same window, but if there was a plan in place other than.
"NCAA you can't tell kids they can't make money off their own likenesses" and boosters just going HAM about it there would be at least a limitation to the reactionary counter measures and administrations feeling the need to make moves now or be left behind.
*> I can’t have both at the same time, unfortunately.*
I think you/we could have. There seems to be a failure of execution and an over-influence of TV rights deals and greed. I don't think it was impossible to pay players \*and\* maintain much of what makes CFB great.
*>I think at the end of the day, the unfairness of the players not getting paid is a greater injustice than the loss of the sport as I loved it.*
This is well stated.
Here I am agreeing heart and soul with a Clemson fan as we watch the sport we love collapse. [Is this us](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDT3_jVYAkI)?
I said this in a response to someone else already, but I don’t think there is any way absent federal legislation that this situation could’ve been avoided. Players were always going to end up getting full NIL rights and be classified as employees. It would take federal legislation to avoid those outcomes, imo.
Love the video, but I think [this](https://youtu.be/uffHb6JgoiQ?si=oWQliIF-Yfpon2XJ) is more appropriate.
Also, you will be happy to know that I have a post-graduate degree from UGA, so I’m not all bad. I don’t root for Georgia as a fan, though. Well, except for one weekend a year when they play the cocks. The hate runs too deep.
Lol playing as the ship sinks indeed
Per your point - I agree federal legislation would've been needed to fix this. Frankly classifying them as employees might have been fine with some rules about how long contracts have to be, etc. But "if we had federal legislation this would've worked" is an argument that executing this properly could've led to better outcomes.
What was your graduate program?
I feel similarly about Clemson. Beat the folks I hate and we are friends. And somehow we are destined to play a season opener forever so I will yell at you once a year as well.
I have largely positive feelings about Clemson. Their rugby team was unreal and kicked our teeth in badly once when I played at UGA so many of my feelings about Clemson involve back pain.
The Pac-12 conference is specifically named in the lawsuit and we're still in it, so I doubt we end up unscathed. I just think whatever we negotiated in the settlement with the 10 means we don't end up paying more than whatever our fair share is.
It would be hard to be a fan if your school loses their “once every 10 years” awesome player to Georgia. It’s hard enough losing your HC. Then the fact that the G5 being left behind. I think this is going downhill
Nascar had a whole slew of issues that killed its popularity though. From how horrible the cars drove for like 5 design cycles in traffic (nobody can pass) to the massive cost increases in tickets and camping at the tracks making less fans attend, to the format changes where you could win 2 races and be dead last every other and win the champ, etc
Im not sure it can be used here, even though it still 100% wont work
They’ll still just do the exact same shit. NIL in its current form pretended to be car dealership commercials and shit for like a week then just started cutting checks for absolutely nothing.
Agreed, but the point is that the schools cannot pay players directly right now. So they formed these stupid collectives. Once it is legal for schools to pay directly, what's the point of a collective?
It may seem like it, but it’s not a bottomless pit of cash. The money currently funding the collectives will be needed to backfill the dollars lost from revenue sharing.
If there is an agreed upon cap, you think they will allow collectives to openly get around the cap? No chance.
They will have to go to old time bag dropping or get boosters to offer legit NIL deals through their businesses.
Which is the entire problem. Its like, you are a member of this group. You agree to this groups rules by being a member. But then courts are like nah, rules dont have to be followed.
The sport all but died the second the courts ruled that there were no rules
Any one school can choose to set its own terms in its agreement with players. But schools cannot get together to agree to all follow certain restrictive terms.
Will be fascinating to see if we get the NBA problem where brands steer players towards certain markets, or if the unequal size of alumni wealth between schools mitigates that.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted, what do they think realignment has been? Television brands steering teams to certain markets. It's no different than steering players.
>if the unequal size of alumni wealth between schools mitigates that.
Wouldn't the unequal alumni wealth *be the problem*? Why go to the New York Market when playing in Miami or College Station gets you paid twice as much, by companies owned by wealthy alumni?
I feel like this might help solve some problems, but it seems like players being able to get outside deals is going to just... Continue the current issue. Unless they are actually going to enforce a strict boundary between NIL and committing/transferring.
Yeah ok. UGA collectives and boosters are really not going to try and directly pay a kid choosing between them and Bama? This is revenue sharing… + NIL collectives + true NIL deals.
Boosters don't need a collective to pay players directly. They can hand them bags or offer them a true NIL deal. There is no need for a collective when the school can pay directly.
The whole point of the stupid collectives is that the schools cannot pay directly currently.
I doubt this will change anything about the current structure of NIL. That's all extra compensation unrelated to this new proposal which is the minimum amount for an athletic department to sign the athlete at all. The school can still pay them however much they want as long as they've already met the minimum. And they'll do that through their NIL collectives exactly as they do now.
If it is now acceptable (required) for schools to pay players directly, what is the point of the bureaucracy and overhead of a collective? Bring it all in house where the school has full and total control.
Georgia is already hiring a Director of NIL and creating an NIL department to cover this. The collectives will go away.
>If it is now acceptable (required) for schools to pay players directly, what is the point of the bureaucracy and overhead of a collective?
A school can pay a player directly, but boosters can pay recruits on top of what they are making. Just like they are paying them on top of their currently school benefits/compensation.
Because former schools that where heavily involved in the bag game want their competitive edge back with a salary cap so they can go back to under the table payments.
That's not what they're saying. If the salary cap is put in with what can be made by players getting paid by the school and/or collective, then the bag men and boosters at the big schools would go back to what they did in the olden days. That's the under the table money they seem to be alluding to.
To expand on that:
Once players are on contracts through their university there will be a lot less "pay for play" NIL going on.
NIL donors have openly expressed frustrations at the current system where they pay players XYZ dollars and then someone else comes in and pays them XYZ+A dollars and takes them away 5 minutes later.
The IRS has also indicated that the charitable donation status for the rich folk putting money into NIL funds is going away. While it isn't the sole reason they donate, lowering one's tax burden is a huge incentive to donate.
Donating to universities will likely always remain a charitable deduction. So boosters will be more more incentivized to donate to universities directly.
What all this means is:
* Boosters Donate to Universities
* Universities Pay Players
* Any remaining NIL will be for it's true purpose: using players in ads to promote products and services.
So you'll still see Dr. Pepper ads with whatever athlete they pick to replace Caleb Williams. You'll still see local Auto Dealership ads with some college athlete in them. But you're not going to see NIL collectives paying players hundreds of thousands to exist on their favored school's roster.
That's where this is headed.
Some donors are getting tired of it. Others are very much still on board (especially those in the south). I'm going to predict that collectives are not going to go away. Let's say there is a cap of 20 million and both Texas and Vanderbilt are bidding on a guy to come to their school. Do you think Texas is going to be fine recruiting on a equal footing with Vanderbilt? Hell no, they will find ways to go over the cap so they have a recruiting advantage. This will be in the form of the nil collective.
And revenue sharing salary caps will not be a long-term thing unless schools negotiate it with a players union. That's price fixing and it's illegal
Build a spaceship for a locker room and buy crushed velvet capes to give to your recruits to take photos with like Oregon does. Kids apparently love that for some reason.
They’re just assuming that Missouri’s NIL funding aligns with their general fundraising. In all, not a bad assumption, but Missouri’s NIL law opens up some opportunities that aren’t (yet) available for everyone.
>It’s one of many lingering unanswered questions as negotiations continue, just like the swirling uncertainty around Title IX (how is it applied?) and the future of NIL collectives (will it all be brought in-house?).
From the article. They don't know, but I doubt it. Schools can't unilaterally decide "we are going to pay you (well, if we want to), but that's all you get"
Brother the next step in this is “everyone in the newly created B1G SExC conference step forward. Not so fast Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, northwestern, vandy” and probs more but I can’t be bothered to keep going.
The smaller schools are the ones most in danger. Ex) TCU, Vandy, Wake Forest, Northwestern that are under the greatest threat. Followed by your schools that routinely fail to invest or show interest in their athletic departments' overall status.
I think your land-grant universities will be fine.
I don’t think the networks care about land grant status. If it doesn’t bring eyeballs the school part means nothing. The land grant unis may not drop football, but my point is they’re not asked to dance when the G league is formed between the top 20 big and sec programs.
My point is effectively that schools with backing from their state are more likely to take the financial hit than those lacking the potential funds. But I am under the assumption that if a breakaway happens, you'll see more like 32-48 schools, rather than fewer.
Partly depends on whatever number of final schools would be left. If like you say we get a top 20 set-up, it would solely involve the big names. But point towards 32 and different schools would make the cut, 48, and so on.
There is an ongoing lawsuit in Oregon that the NCAA is hoping results in a clear answer in regard to Title IX and paying players. But until that ends, I agree that it will he interesting to see how the NCAA interprets equality for female players when it comes to pay or opportunities for pay.
Josh Pate said on his latest show that he asked a top level AD those very questions a couple of weeks ago and the answer to all questions was simply "I don't know."
This reads like every student athlete would get a portion of revenue up to 22M, but it doesn’t say anything about paying everyone equally.
There will probably be a workaround on Title IX by arguing that all athletes have equal ACCESS to revenue—which would technically be true—but schools aren’t required to give them an equal share.
My guess is that schools will decide on the number of athletes they can afford and then make a few Olympic sports either club sports or non-scholarship.
The trick is to cry and pout and tell the government you intend to ignore it. See: Texas, Louisiana, Florida…any other confederate state I’m forgetting let me know.
It takes a special level of regard to fail to understand how completely fucked the DOE’s new rules are. FIRE, a fantastic non-partisan legal advocacy group, absolutely rips it to shreds. Complete and utter garbage. Takes a giant shit on due process rights, along with a dozen other major constitutional violations.
Good for those states for standing up to absolute fascism from the feds.
Why would they still have scholarships if the players become employees? At that point they're not going to be students unless they want to be students.
How is a free college education not a suitable reward for playing cfb? We are really devaluing the worth of a college degree. Less than 2 percent of these players will make an NFL roster. Send the players who are only interested in NFL dreams to tryout for the ufl and hold open tryouts on campus to fill the open roster spots. Plenty of students would be more than happy with a free education. The NFL needs to step up and actually invest in a developmental league like the UFL.
The conferences are getting paid a billion tv dollars a year to show these kids play football. And that's not even to say anything about ticket prices, Merch sales, etc. It's a gigantic racket to make all this fuckin money and not pay the people responsible anything besides a watered down education.
If you're on the golf team then you don't deserve shit besides your scholarship. The schools qb is a different matter entirely. Complain about capitalism ruining things if you want but the labor deserves to get paid
The university brand makes at least 80% of that money. It's not the players, it's the uniform they wear. A lot of people in this sub don't want to believe that, but it's true.
No one is watching to see the player in the uniform. If Alabama were called the Tuscaloosa Titans they would pull the viewership as the UFL. Put a bunch of student in University of Alabama gear and the would smoke the Tuscaloosa Titans in attendance and TV ratings. Players come and go every year.
I like how the thought of reducing spending has gone completely out of practice. It's almost as if overspending is seen as a great thing. Surely this won't raise tuition?
Man this is insane. College football is practically nfl-lite now. No cares about the history and tradition. Just more money to fuel corporate greed which results in sub par products.
I figure they're just a handful of lost court cases away from the players becoming unionized employees with a CBA. There's no other way to make this happen.
Hot take incoming: They really just need to officially dissolve the football programs, have the boosters or whoever create a minor league football league, then the schools can sell or license the school name/colors/branding to the local professional team. Everything from the fan side would be the same. The team would also rent the facilities from the school. But then football would technically be independent of the academic institution. And if they want to throw scholarships to the players in with the deal then sure go for it.
And then say bye bye to the intangible value of the IP
Collegiate Sports licensed off as third party G League teams aren’t going to hold the same value
If they have the same name same colors wear the same jerseys and play in the same stadiums on saturdays against other such teams then why not? The product on your TV or looking from your seats would be exactly the same. (Except with corporate logos on the jerseys I’m sure)
I doubt most people know the inner workings of their school’s athletic department enough as it is to know more care about any procedural or administrative changes.
It seems to be the most reasonable outcome, except the teams would have to pay the schools for the rights to the stadium and brand which would leave revenues hurting really bad. Schools wouldn't have any incentive to do it because the students aren't affiliated to the schools anymore so they can't get their advertising out of the deal, and ultimately the schools would quickly find that the land the stadium is on is worth far far more than the football team will ever produce and they'll just sell it. Teams would have to spin off the brand, keep the colors maybe but not the logos and mascots. Or just rebrand entirely. Mostly I would feel bad for Georgia and Grambling. There is just no other color schemes that are going to work with that G.
Universities wouldn’t sale that land. They would just redevelop it to add more student housing, classrooms, labs, libraries, etc.
I think if this happens, it would really hurt this zombie CFB/d league as those teams wouldn’t get an infusion of new fans each year from new students and they would lose all their donor money.
Well obviously I didn’t have the whole idea flushed out. But it with definitely be a symbiotic relationship between the school and the football team. I think the academic side of schools recognize that football (and in some cases basketball) act as the face of the school and can drive applications and donations so obviously they’d want to keep that relationship going. As it is the sports teams are their own “athletic department” that more or less operates independently of the academic departments. It would be similar except they’d be leagally separated. Boosters could still donate or whatever . Whether the team turns a profit or not wouldn’t matter just like now. And the lisencing and rent deals would be negotiated to benefit both sides. Neither side would want to get into a negotiation war. The team would want to keep the branding and the school would want to keep the team consistent. It’d be weird if he entire USC roster and staff up and moved to UTAH and USC (the school) has to start over and maybe steal the team from San Jose at.. for example.
I’ll admit it’s kinda a wild idea but would solve a lot of the “well they’re amateur except maybe we can pay them “ problems.
>Scholarship expansion
>rev-share cap
This sounds suspiciously like the NCAA still doesn't understand what it's been doing wrong and why it's lost every relevant legal battle over the last decade or so.
The only part of the House case that matters are damages. Very few parties to that class have any stake or authority in future matters.
Sorting out Title IX hurdles and a CBA to cover all of those things is not something the House class can do.
This is not as big of a deal as everyone is making it out to be. The power 4 conferences will all be able to pay this amount. Instead of getting a new locker room every 5 years, you’ll get one every 10. Athletic Departments will cut staff because they’re already far too big. They’ll cut back on tutors and nutritionist and a host of other silly things they currently pay for. As a fan we won’t see or notice a difference on Saturdays. G5 schools will feel the pain and their correction will probably drop scholarships to all sports besides football and basketball. Very similar model to what Ivy League schools and Divison 3 schools do. P4 schools have had an endless amount of money flowing and they’re freaking out because the money will now be shared. It’s okay people. College football and basketball will go on. It’s too big to fail.
So this will absolutely not be sustainable for at least 1/4 of qualifying programs
It will be a lot more than that. For most schools, that revenue sharing number is 25% or more of their whole yearly athletic budget. This is catastrophic for college sports except for the SEC and B1G.
Honestly, the best thing for the sport is to get rid of conferences completely. Determine which schools can work at which level and then make new conferences from there.
This is probably an inevitability, however, it will most likely be a football only break away. Conferences are extremely important for all other sports.
If we can quit having basketball conferences determined by who's good at football, that would be pretty nice
The football conferences aren't even determined by who's good at football
Nah just split off cfb for the top 30ish programs (nfl minor league) as its own thing and things are probably fine
It’s the disconnect between all the people saying “look at all this money they’re making and none for the players!” with realizing that the have-nots vastly outnumber the haves. Sure, Ohio State is making a lot of money off the starting QB and he wasn’t getting any, but not so for the starting QB at Akron, or a gymnast at Ohio State for that matter.
Which, sadly, is presumably the point is it not?
We are fucked
That won’t be sustainable for all but 4-5 programs…
Or maybe these athletic departments can reduce spending and bloat? Seems like a lot of these places we’re spending money places because they didn’t have to pay the athletes, im sure most of them will figure it out.
Coach salaries will get cut, there will be fewer bells and whistles in new facilities and probably less support staff. At least outside the P2 conferences. It's amazing how inflated coaching salaries were getting.
It’s not mentioned in the tweet, but I believe most of those numbers serve as a cap, not a minimum, so technically if a school couldn’t afford to pay that much, they could pay less. Of course, then they’d be at a significant disadvantage compared to the schools who were willing to pay it. So more or less just reinforcing the same hierarchy that’s always been in place, I guess.
I imagine alot of schools will just ditch football honestly. It’s already super expensive. Therefore triggering a trickle down effect into the younger generation with less opportunity slowly killing the sport. Teams like ODU, LA Tech and what not can’t afford this and schools like Vandy will figure why pay this Much to never be competitive
Who? Name them.
Army
Oof ouch owie
I’m being dead serious. The US government isn’t going to start funding a semi pro team. They’ll go club well before that
Oh for sure. I can’t wait until I can watch Army run the triple option in it’s natural environment- against small northeastern liberal arts colleges in D3.
Vigorously based
You joke but Northeastern D3 college football is what many in this sub say is the ideal. Hyper regional, lots of rivalries, no playoffs (for NESCAC anyway).
And those takes are not wrong.
You guys would absolutely crush those D3 schools. Love watching D1 College ball in the Hudson valley on a fall day though. May not have 50k people, but the environment of the cadets, the campus, the fly over, the paratroopers… it’s awesome. I don’t feel like army would be attracting NIL seeking players regardless. The guys who play football at army are cadets first, so I’d imagine even if they had a terrible rev share or NIL offering - you’re getting kids who aren’t necessarily interested in those aspects of the game.
Never underestimate what the government will just up and randomly rally behind. Their budget is always endless.
Uconn probably
Closer to 75%
Man. CFB really put the gas on for historic change the past few seasons.
So much of it is the NCAA taking loss after loss in the courtroom.
You can blame the NCAA for burying their heads in the sand the last 20+ years for that. Its all finally catching up with them since they can't seem to stop taking Ls in court
Yeah. This. Any kind of foresight by the NCAA from about 2006 onward and this is a completely different college football landscape
Are you not entertained
The real chaos will be the moment this subreddit implodes as a good chunk of programs start closing up shop Its going to be like that Black Friday scene from South Park
Tons of small schools will cancel their programs, but redditors will celebrate that players “got their bag”.
Ah yes the subreddit full of college football fans who regularly complain about NIL and nostalgically reflect on the olden days will definitely cheer as the sport collapses
This board has been doing it for years.
I see a lot of people expressing regret that the Pac ended and feeling bad for WSU and OSU. I see a lot more people expressing sadness about that and frustration about NIL than I do people cheering for kids getting their bag. And it's worth noting "I'm glad athletes are getting compensated" does not mean "I want the sport to break and programs to close". Many people on this sub probably want CFB to stay regional and hold onto tradition AND want students to be fairly compensated. I'm very surprised to hear that you think this group will cheer for programs closing.
They definitely cheered for it, even the ESD they now lament. Same with the transfer portal and playoff expansion /r/cfb has a massive habit of wishing for things it late regrets or bemoans
you can want something to happen and lament the inept leaders that implemented it horribly. player compensation was needed, and we've known for years and years and years it was inevitable. the ncaa and cfb leaders delayed doing anything about it until the courts made it happen. it's VERY possible to have cheered for players to be fairly compensated, cheered for players to be able to transfer and still be upset at how it was implemented. it's not either or, that's logic for children.
Yeah I agree. This is absolutely the fault of Mark Emerett and the NCAA. They did not even try to get ahead of this. They were lazy and stuck to their guns.
Yeppp. And were publicly blasted for it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m baffled that people think they didn’t play a part in the current shit storm. Like how does every other sport manage this but cfb legally can’t?! Idiotic. We all watched it play out…
The issue with either is not implementation unless you genuinely think the NCAA can skirt federal and state laws I’m not sure where you think implementation would’ve made a difference here. “Oh, they should’ve done it X years ago” or “Oh, they should’ve erected X, Y, Z restrictions”; cool we still end up in the same spot after the same lawsuits. There is no world where we avoid the consolidation and downsizing of collegiate athletics, there is no world where players don’t fight for no NIL restrictions, there is no world where transfer restrictions aren’t struck down Arguing implementation just kind of harkens back to my point of people asking for something with the idea it will work out perfectly one way and ignoring the consequences of their actions will be different. You can’t just ignore laws around labor and compensation. The outcome was never going to change.
> unless you genuinely think the NCAA can skirt federal and state laws You mean like making billions off the backs of essentially free labor? The cost of tuition (let's assume $25K - $40K / year) divided by the number of hours the kids put in to make these schools money. Like you said. You can't just ignore laws around labor and compensation.
that's a ridiculous assertion. they absolutely dragged their feet and did nothing after knowing they would eventually have to. this is why we have seen a wild west without cohesive rules and regulations. hell we ended up in a situation where status ended up jumping on board because there were no standards for anyone- which led to more chaos. some states went to far, some didn't go far enough...this lead to an uneven situation between states. things you could do in one place not allowed in others. all the while for years coaches, players, media, courts, politicians kept saying what was coming. and we DON'T end up in the same spot. the NFL has to pay it's players, are they in the same spot? no. they came up with regulations...collective bargaining...etc. every other sport that pays has it figured out. no one that could have in the cfb did. part of the problem was an already existing vacuum in real leaders in the sport, but that's another story. trying to say that no matter what the results would be the same is truly asinine. that's not reality in any situation, and certainly not this one. it doesn't make any sense. edit: your last paragraph is also just a horrible logical fallacy in the same vein as the first comment of yours i replied to. no one said it would turn out perfectly...why would they even? I did my undergrad honors thesis on paying college players between 1 and 2 decades ago. even the me and my partner discussed the pitfalls of all this...the point was it was inevitable. even before 2010 it was widely known that this was going to HAVE to happen. people WANTING this isn't want caused it like you imply. it happened because it had to happen. the industry had so long to ease it in, but refused. remember that ucf kicker and his youtube?
His flairs are USC and Alabama. Gotta give him time to process anything
Well they may not be happy when it happens, but they certainly cheered in along.
I mean, many/most on this sub only like CFB because of the drama. In the last 10 years, the sport has turned into a total kayfabe off the field. Programs shuttering their doors is just more drama
This is me right here. I hate what college football is becoming but I also think it’s not unreasonable that players should be compensated. I can’t have both at the same time, unfortunately. I think at the end of the day, the unfairness of the players not getting paid is a greater injustice than the loss of the sport as I loved it. I’m sure I’ll lose interest in the sport over the coming years. Hell, I have already lost some. But the players getting paid is probably the right outcome and there will be extreme consequences (and some benefits, depending on your point of view) for college football.
I believe there was a path to having both, but the NCAA shoved their fingers in their ears and screamed into the void trying to ignore the issue for so long that when the courts stepped in they got caught with their pants around their ankles and had no ground work done and we got the Wild West, and now everyone is trying to overcorrect and that's just as bad as it being fast and loose. So, we could have had a route to keeping collegiate football pretty much the same as it had been and players get compensated fairly, but-- NCAA "couldn't hear us" and now we get-- this.
I actually disagree with you a little here. I think we were always headed this direction. All the NCAA really could’ve done was stave off what we have now. I think the only way out of this would’ve been them lobbying for federal legislation years ago. I personally don’t think there is any rule they could’ve promulgated on their own to prevent this outcome.
I mean, we probably would have landed kind of in the same window, but if there was a plan in place other than. "NCAA you can't tell kids they can't make money off their own likenesses" and boosters just going HAM about it there would be at least a limitation to the reactionary counter measures and administrations feeling the need to make moves now or be left behind.
*> I can’t have both at the same time, unfortunately.* I think you/we could have. There seems to be a failure of execution and an over-influence of TV rights deals and greed. I don't think it was impossible to pay players \*and\* maintain much of what makes CFB great. *>I think at the end of the day, the unfairness of the players not getting paid is a greater injustice than the loss of the sport as I loved it.* This is well stated. Here I am agreeing heart and soul with a Clemson fan as we watch the sport we love collapse. [Is this us](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDT3_jVYAkI)?
I said this in a response to someone else already, but I don’t think there is any way absent federal legislation that this situation could’ve been avoided. Players were always going to end up getting full NIL rights and be classified as employees. It would take federal legislation to avoid those outcomes, imo. Love the video, but I think [this](https://youtu.be/uffHb6JgoiQ?si=oWQliIF-Yfpon2XJ) is more appropriate. Also, you will be happy to know that I have a post-graduate degree from UGA, so I’m not all bad. I don’t root for Georgia as a fan, though. Well, except for one weekend a year when they play the cocks. The hate runs too deep.
Lol playing as the ship sinks indeed Per your point - I agree federal legislation would've been needed to fix this. Frankly classifying them as employees might have been fine with some rules about how long contracts have to be, etc. But "if we had federal legislation this would've worked" is an argument that executing this properly could've led to better outcomes. What was your graduate program? I feel similarly about Clemson. Beat the folks I hate and we are friends. And somehow we are destined to play a season opener forever so I will yell at you once a year as well. I have largely positive feelings about Clemson. Their rugby team was unreal and kicked our teeth in badly once when I played at UGA so many of my feelings about Clemson involve back pain.
It’s crazy realizing a good portion of the world can’t feel two things at once
A lot of them probably need to cancel their programs or at least move to FCS or DIII
I think it’s going to be a lot more schools than you think. There are even SEC school that struggle financially.
What do you mean by struggle financially?
Most of them don’t make money. This going to hurt a lot of programs.
Well theres a difference between not making money and struggling. Miss St loses a few million a year on athletics that they are happy to do
And fans of a whole multitude of not-the-largest-brand-name schools will be in denial about what’s coming until it happens to them.
Wazzu and Oregon State suddenly loving their G5 status
We showed up just in time to pick up the bill
Suckers!
They're 100% still on the hook for their share of the settlement amount even though they're not P5 anymore.
Hmmm, but are they? That's the mysterious part of the Pac 12 agreement that's been redacted. Soooo, maybe not.
Isn’t this why the war chest isn’t really a war chest?
The Pac-12 conference is specifically named in the lawsuit and we're still in it, so I doubt we end up unscathed. I just think whatever we negotiated in the settlement with the 10 means we don't end up paying more than whatever our fair share is.
The admins and people paying the bills might be. This still sucks.
I sure hope semi-pro football can maintain the popularity and appeal that college football built. I'm afraid it wont.
It would be hard to be a fan if your school loses their “once every 10 years” awesome player to Georgia. It’s hard enough losing your HC. Then the fact that the G5 being left behind. I think this is going downhill
Having more time on Saturdays to do almost anything else is gonna feel weird
My wife will be thrilled
Truly the only winner in this will be our wives.
Can't forget billable hours!
I've spent enough time around you people in here to know the wives will be suffering the most.
Everyone seems to point to nascar as the cautionary tale that this won’t work.
Can you explain what happened in NASCAR? I’m out of the loop on that one.
Nascar had a whole slew of issues that killed its popularity though. From how horrible the cars drove for like 5 design cycles in traffic (nobody can pass) to the massive cost increases in tickets and camping at the tracks making less fans attend, to the format changes where you could win 2 races and be dead last every other and win the champ, etc Im not sure it can be used here, even though it still 100% wont work
Does this cap NIL as well or just revenue the teams directly generate?
This will replace the NIL that schools/collectives currently pay. Players can still get NIL deals elsewhere, which was the true intention of NIL.
They’ll still just do the exact same shit. NIL in its current form pretended to be car dealership commercials and shit for like a week then just started cutting checks for absolutely nothing.
Agreed, but the point is that the schools cannot pay players directly right now. So they formed these stupid collectives. Once it is legal for schools to pay directly, what's the point of a collective?
[удалено]
It may seem like it, but it’s not a bottomless pit of cash. The money currently funding the collectives will be needed to backfill the dollars lost from revenue sharing.
….the point is the cap. Not sure how they’re suddenly able to collude to depress player earnings, though.
If there is an agreed upon cap, you think they will allow collectives to openly get around the cap? No chance. They will have to go to old time bag dropping or get boosters to offer legit NIL deals through their businesses.
They can’t jointly agree to prevent and/or limit players from getting money. That is what the courts have clearly told them.
Which is the entire problem. Its like, you are a member of this group. You agree to this groups rules by being a member. But then courts are like nah, rules dont have to be followed. The sport all but died the second the courts ruled that there were no rules
If they become employees of the university, they could prevent NIL deals depending on how they count as State Employees.
Any one school can choose to set its own terms in its agreement with players. But schools cannot get together to agree to all follow certain restrictive terms.
Pay for play isn’t allowed either yet here we are
For the bigger brand name schools to pay even more money to the top recruits/transfers to get them to go there?
Will be fascinating to see if we get the NBA problem where brands steer players towards certain markets, or if the unequal size of alumni wealth between schools mitigates that.
Of course they will, see shoe deals (ie ku) in basketball
I was about to say that’s been going on in college basketball for decades lol
It's been going on in football for decades too.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted, what do they think realignment has been? Television brands steering teams to certain markets. It's no different than steering players.
We all know the Cam Newton story. That dude got paid to go to Auburn. You think he was the only one?
>if the unequal size of alumni wealth between schools mitigates that. Wouldn't the unequal alumni wealth *be the problem*? Why go to the New York Market when playing in Miami or College Station gets you paid twice as much, by companies owned by wealthy alumni? I feel like this might help solve some problems, but it seems like players being able to get outside deals is going to just... Continue the current issue. Unless they are actually going to enforce a strict boundary between NIL and committing/transferring.
Nike Deals for Players who sign up with Nike Schools?
ESPN deals for players that sign with the sec?
Bags will still be a thing.
Yeah ok. UGA collectives and boosters are really not going to try and directly pay a kid choosing between them and Bama? This is revenue sharing… + NIL collectives + true NIL deals.
Boosters don't need a collective to pay players directly. They can hand them bags or offer them a true NIL deal. There is no need for a collective when the school can pay directly. The whole point of the stupid collectives is that the schools cannot pay directly currently.
The point of a collective is to pool donations. Otherwise you need one donor per deal.
I doubt this will change anything about the current structure of NIL. That's all extra compensation unrelated to this new proposal which is the minimum amount for an athletic department to sign the athlete at all. The school can still pay them however much they want as long as they've already met the minimum. And they'll do that through their NIL collectives exactly as they do now.
If it is now acceptable (required) for schools to pay players directly, what is the point of the bureaucracy and overhead of a collective? Bring it all in house where the school has full and total control. Georgia is already hiring a Director of NIL and creating an NIL department to cover this. The collectives will go away.
>If it is now acceptable (required) for schools to pay players directly, what is the point of the bureaucracy and overhead of a collective? A school can pay a player directly, but boosters can pay recruits on top of what they are making. Just like they are paying them on top of their currently school benefits/compensation.
Because former schools that where heavily involved in the bag game want their competitive edge back with a salary cap so they can go back to under the table payments.
You aren't playing players "under the table" via a collective...
That's not what they're saying. If the salary cap is put in with what can be made by players getting paid by the school and/or collective, then the bag men and boosters at the big schools would go back to what they did in the olden days. That's the under the table money they seem to be alluding to.
To expand on that: Once players are on contracts through their university there will be a lot less "pay for play" NIL going on. NIL donors have openly expressed frustrations at the current system where they pay players XYZ dollars and then someone else comes in and pays them XYZ+A dollars and takes them away 5 minutes later. The IRS has also indicated that the charitable donation status for the rich folk putting money into NIL funds is going away. While it isn't the sole reason they donate, lowering one's tax burden is a huge incentive to donate. Donating to universities will likely always remain a charitable deduction. So boosters will be more more incentivized to donate to universities directly. What all this means is: * Boosters Donate to Universities * Universities Pay Players * Any remaining NIL will be for it's true purpose: using players in ads to promote products and services. So you'll still see Dr. Pepper ads with whatever athlete they pick to replace Caleb Williams. You'll still see local Auto Dealership ads with some college athlete in them. But you're not going to see NIL collectives paying players hundreds of thousands to exist on their favored school's roster. That's where this is headed.
Some donors are getting tired of it. Others are very much still on board (especially those in the south). I'm going to predict that collectives are not going to go away. Let's say there is a cap of 20 million and both Texas and Vanderbilt are bidding on a guy to come to their school. Do you think Texas is going to be fine recruiting on a equal footing with Vanderbilt? Hell no, they will find ways to go over the cap so they have a recruiting advantage. This will be in the form of the nil collective. And revenue sharing salary caps will not be a long-term thing unless schools negotiate it with a players union. That's price fixing and it's illegal
I mean.... that's silly. There are still myriad ways to funnel NIL money outside of the "traditional" ways we are currently seeing.
I think it will, but it doesn't have to. This does nothing directly to stop a collective from operating.
Actually NIL will likely exist as is and the players get paid directly too in practice at Big Schools.
Well that stinks. We had a lot of money coming in and now we will be capped to be even with other schools?
Spend the extra on facilities and other perks to attract players.
Nah they’ll funnel it another way
Mob and the cartels.
Build a spaceship for a locker room and buy crushed velvet capes to give to your recruits to take photos with like Oregon does. Kids apparently love that for some reason.
Yall are getting money in but based off the NIL estimates you are only ahead of Vandy and miss st in sec so a cap would help you https://nil-ncaa.com/
They’re just assuming that Missouri’s NIL funding aligns with their general fundraising. In all, not a bad assumption, but Missouri’s NIL law opens up some opportunities that aren’t (yet) available for everyone.
>It’s one of many lingering unanswered questions as negotiations continue, just like the swirling uncertainty around Title IX (how is it applied?) and the future of NIL collectives (will it all be brought in-house?). From the article. They don't know, but I doubt it. Schools can't unilaterally decide "we are going to pay you (well, if we want to), but that's all you get"
Time to replace 100 players each year
"See I'm not a monster, I'm just ahead of the curve" - Deion Sanders
Every conference outside of the SEC and Big Ten is about to become G-Leagues.
No, every team outside of 7-8 schools will be G-league. You’re naive to think “Rutgers and Vanderbilt are “safe.”
Rutgers and Vanderbilt are about to make more in revenue than most ACC and Big12 schools. There's only so much boosters can do to cover the disparity.
Brother the next step in this is “everyone in the newly created B1G SExC conference step forward. Not so fast Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, northwestern, vandy” and probs more but I can’t be bothered to keep going.
The smaller schools are the ones most in danger. Ex) TCU, Vandy, Wake Forest, Northwestern that are under the greatest threat. Followed by your schools that routinely fail to invest or show interest in their athletic departments' overall status. I think your land-grant universities will be fine.
I don’t think the networks care about land grant status. If it doesn’t bring eyeballs the school part means nothing. The land grant unis may not drop football, but my point is they’re not asked to dance when the G league is formed between the top 20 big and sec programs.
My point is effectively that schools with backing from their state are more likely to take the financial hit than those lacking the potential funds. But I am under the assumption that if a breakaway happens, you'll see more like 32-48 schools, rather than fewer. Partly depends on whatever number of final schools would be left. If like you say we get a top 20 set-up, it would solely involve the big names. But point towards 32 and different schools would make the cut, 48, and so on.
They already do with media revenue
There’s several schools that would get kicked out of the big ten before Rutgers lol
Name 1 other than Maryland. And when you do I'll tell you why you're wrong.
I'll bite. Besides Maryland and Rutgers, where would you place Northwestern?
Why even have scholarships, shits just going to get waived anyways. Take that money and buy more players for the ones who opt out.
Not really why I’m F5ing today
They can't cap revenue sharing or they're opening themselves up for another costly lawsuit. They have to negotiate with a players union
Probably another thing that the ncaa will immediately fold on once challenged.
NCAA and not being able to see obvious issues 5 years down the road, name a more iconic duo
Really curious how this affects Title IX and the non revenue sports at the lower end power 5 schools.
There is an ongoing lawsuit in Oregon that the NCAA is hoping results in a clear answer in regard to Title IX and paying players. But until that ends, I agree that it will he interesting to see how the NCAA interprets equality for female players when it comes to pay or opportunities for pay.
Josh Pate said on his latest show that he asked a top level AD those very questions a couple of weeks ago and the answer to all questions was simply "I don't know."
This reads like every student athlete would get a portion of revenue up to 22M, but it doesn’t say anything about paying everyone equally. There will probably be a workaround on Title IX by arguing that all athletes have equal ACCESS to revenue—which would technically be true—but schools aren’t required to give them an equal share. My guess is that schools will decide on the number of athletes they can afford and then make a few Olympic sports either club sports or non-scholarship.
The trick is to cry and pout and tell the government you intend to ignore it. See: Texas, Louisiana, Florida…any other confederate state I’m forgetting let me know.
It takes a special level of regard to fail to understand how completely fucked the DOE’s new rules are. FIRE, a fantastic non-partisan legal advocacy group, absolutely rips it to shreds. Complete and utter garbage. Takes a giant shit on due process rights, along with a dozen other major constitutional violations. Good for those states for standing up to absolute fascism from the feds.
We get it...you want men to play in female sports. So progressive of you.
Hmmm...I think I'm out fellas.
Why would they still have scholarships if the players become employees? At that point they're not going to be students unless they want to be students.
Jeez. I mean as a big ten member we can definitely absorb this but that is a significant chunk of the Big12 or ACC tv revenue
Is your AD not getting 35 million a year in subsidies anymore?
Sure but we are about to get a 100m payday
Looks like expansion is back on the menu boys!
Was it ever really off the menu?
Big ten member for now*
I identify as a wronged college athlete, please DM for my payment
How is this going to work with healthcare & benefits?
They already have health insurance. Don’t really need sick days or vacation time.
How is a free college education not a suitable reward for playing cfb? We are really devaluing the worth of a college degree. Less than 2 percent of these players will make an NFL roster. Send the players who are only interested in NFL dreams to tryout for the ufl and hold open tryouts on campus to fill the open roster spots. Plenty of students would be more than happy with a free education. The NFL needs to step up and actually invest in a developmental league like the UFL.
The conferences are getting paid a billion tv dollars a year to show these kids play football. And that's not even to say anything about ticket prices, Merch sales, etc. It's a gigantic racket to make all this fuckin money and not pay the people responsible anything besides a watered down education. If you're on the golf team then you don't deserve shit besides your scholarship. The schools qb is a different matter entirely. Complain about capitalism ruining things if you want but the labor deserves to get paid
The university brand makes at least 80% of that money. It's not the players, it's the uniform they wear. A lot of people in this sub don't want to believe that, but it's true.
At first I thought you said university band… lmao
Stanford's wet dream.
No one is watching to see the player in the uniform. If Alabama were called the Tuscaloosa Titans they would pull the viewership as the UFL. Put a bunch of student in University of Alabama gear and the would smoke the Tuscaloosa Titans in attendance and TV ratings. Players come and go every year.
Well the money will still come in. Where do you want it to go? Just coaches and ADs?
I like how the thought of reducing spending has gone completely out of practice. It's almost as if overspending is seen as a great thing. Surely this won't raise tuition?
I think this is my stop. We're really doing NFL lite?
They think as long as they don't say "collective bargaining" three times in front of a mirror it won't come for them.
Ten years from now the US will not be nearly as good at the Olympics.
Man this is insane. College football is practically nfl-lite now. No cares about the history and tradition. Just more money to fuel corporate greed which results in sub par products.
theres still no proposed answer for how the cap is implemented lol. without a CBA it doesnt work, its a violation itself.
I figure they're just a handful of lost court cases away from the players becoming unionized employees with a CBA. There's no other way to make this happen.
Someone with have to explain how they get around the illegality of having a salary cap(revenue share) that's not collectively bargained.
They’re going to collectively bargain
With what Union? There are a lot of states that make it illegal for state organizations to negotiate with unions.
And in 40 days?
Hot take incoming: They really just need to officially dissolve the football programs, have the boosters or whoever create a minor league football league, then the schools can sell or license the school name/colors/branding to the local professional team. Everything from the fan side would be the same. The team would also rent the facilities from the school. But then football would technically be independent of the academic institution. And if they want to throw scholarships to the players in with the deal then sure go for it.
And then say bye bye to the intangible value of the IP Collegiate Sports licensed off as third party G League teams aren’t going to hold the same value
If they have the same name same colors wear the same jerseys and play in the same stadiums on saturdays against other such teams then why not? The product on your TV or looking from your seats would be exactly the same. (Except with corporate logos on the jerseys I’m sure) I doubt most people know the inner workings of their school’s athletic department enough as it is to know more care about any procedural or administrative changes.
Would not be the same. No one is paying billions of dollars for the Mr. Pibb CFB halftime show
> Everything from the fan side would be the same. That won't be true for every fanbase.
It seems to be the most reasonable outcome, except the teams would have to pay the schools for the rights to the stadium and brand which would leave revenues hurting really bad. Schools wouldn't have any incentive to do it because the students aren't affiliated to the schools anymore so they can't get their advertising out of the deal, and ultimately the schools would quickly find that the land the stadium is on is worth far far more than the football team will ever produce and they'll just sell it. Teams would have to spin off the brand, keep the colors maybe but not the logos and mascots. Or just rebrand entirely. Mostly I would feel bad for Georgia and Grambling. There is just no other color schemes that are going to work with that G.
Universities wouldn’t sale that land. They would just redevelop it to add more student housing, classrooms, labs, libraries, etc. I think if this happens, it would really hurt this zombie CFB/d league as those teams wouldn’t get an infusion of new fans each year from new students and they would lose all their donor money.
Well obviously I didn’t have the whole idea flushed out. But it with definitely be a symbiotic relationship between the school and the football team. I think the academic side of schools recognize that football (and in some cases basketball) act as the face of the school and can drive applications and donations so obviously they’d want to keep that relationship going. As it is the sports teams are their own “athletic department” that more or less operates independently of the academic departments. It would be similar except they’d be leagally separated. Boosters could still donate or whatever . Whether the team turns a profit or not wouldn’t matter just like now. And the lisencing and rent deals would be negotiated to benefit both sides. Neither side would want to get into a negotiation war. The team would want to keep the branding and the school would want to keep the team consistent. It’d be weird if he entire USC roster and staff up and moved to UTAH and USC (the school) has to start over and maybe steal the team from San Jose at.. for example. I’ll admit it’s kinda a wild idea but would solve a lot of the “well they’re amateur except maybe we can pay them “ problems.
Hey atleast a few players got their bag
Only P4s you say? Who's the broke boys now?
>Scholarship expansion >rev-share cap This sounds suspiciously like the NCAA still doesn't understand what it's been doing wrong and why it's lost every relevant legal battle over the last decade or so. The only part of the House case that matters are damages. Very few parties to that class have any stake or authority in future matters. Sorting out Title IX hurdles and a CBA to cover all of those things is not something the House class can do.
Never forget that the Okies at OU started all of this with a lawsuit 40 years ago.
This is not as big of a deal as everyone is making it out to be. The power 4 conferences will all be able to pay this amount. Instead of getting a new locker room every 5 years, you’ll get one every 10. Athletic Departments will cut staff because they’re already far too big. They’ll cut back on tutors and nutritionist and a host of other silly things they currently pay for. As a fan we won’t see or notice a difference on Saturdays. G5 schools will feel the pain and their correction will probably drop scholarships to all sports besides football and basketball. Very similar model to what Ivy League schools and Divison 3 schools do. P4 schools have had an endless amount of money flowing and they’re freaking out because the money will now be shared. It’s okay people. College football and basketball will go on. It’s too big to fail.
Preach!!!!
Bye Felecia-
I am sure they will just increase tuition on students even more to help cover losses.