|
|
Post by permagrin on Jun 8, 2024 14:35:17 GMT -5
I stopped watching college men's football and basketball when their 'student'-athletes became more about drafts and in-school compensation than education. The better teams look like farm clubs for the pros, the rest are a mixed bag of dim hopefuls scrubbing for NIL nickels and dimes. And most schools playing this game have athletic departments losing money. This isn't what colleges should be about, and the current chaos is beginning to feel like an inflection point. Where the talent and money to be grabbed goes to a minority, while the majority realize they're the chumps taking body-bag games to survive, while still losing money and what's left of school pride doing so. You bring up something that really has bothered me, the nfl rakes in money hand over fist but doesnt have to run a minor league system, they just let the colleges do it. Basketball used to be that way more than it is now, they just sign all the best players after 1 year. |
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Jun 8, 2024 17:11:51 GMT -5
lol at the idea of a 'new model'
it's basically no model.
it's just now professionals playing for a brand university . there are no student-atheletes. gone
some athlete-students I guess. the ones that do not get paid are basically now just contractors who don't have any earning power.
would be interesting to see the new financial dynamics. where the NIL is coming from, the total amount.
if say the average (because so many actually do no make squat of 300 universities is $5k to 10 k a year, with 400 student athletes per uni, that puts NIL total financial inputs at $300 to $600 million a year.
if schollies were running 200 full schollies per year @ $50k average value, then the schollie funding was at $3 billion a year.
& NIL can't even come directly from Univ media money.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 8, 2024 17:18:37 GMT -5
This might be redundant but all of this lays at the feet of Mark Emmert. Why? This has been building up for decades. Pay-for-play issues in college sports go back more than 100 years. And somehow it is all Emmert's doing? |
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Jun 8, 2024 22:16:35 GMT -5
They completely don’t understand how much school pride plays into the support of most colleges. If they lose that because of moving to a pay for play, in and out situation, the money will be much less for everyone! Hasn't happened yet and the players have been getting paid for three years now. College sports are as popular as they've ever been. If the system can't survive without denying the players a fair share of the revenue generated by their labor it wasn't worth saving anyway. You hear this a lot. We pretty much lost college sports for a year. Some teams closed shop, others had social distancing in the stadium, limited schedules and canceled/forfeited games. We come back to NIL sports and people showed up "oh, look, the fans are still with us." Not because of NIL, but because everybody had stimulus money and wanted to return to go DO something. We are 3 years in and everybody - including coaches - complains about free agency, so now they add a playoff, and with realignment there will be lots of things we've never seen before to keep people curious. Next year there is a new financial model and we'll see how that unfolds. How will fans deal with the loss in traditions? Donors liked to get their name on buildings - will they keep paying for people? Fewer conferences means fewer conference championship races and more teams that are done sooner. Does the playoff add interest to the regular season or erode it? If they expand the NCAA basketball tournament does that help or hurt? I'd give it a few more years before I call this one. I'm not sure that the fans aren't going to fade away. We have plenty of evidence that Americans just don't care about minor league sports. College sports isn't going to die overnight, but we'll see how it's going in a few years. |
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Jun 8, 2024 22:44:21 GMT -5
Players at the tip top of DI, which does indeed generate (substantial) revenue beyond expenses, do absolutely deserve a fair share in that revenue. And they’re already well on the path to getting that fair share. Athletes at all levels below that, which by and large don’t generate revenue beyond expenses, don’t have anything to share in. Those tip top DI athletes will get their fair share without having to kill the golden goose. A college charges the same tuition regardless of what major you are in. Most schools charge the same study abroad fee, regardless of where you are going and how much that program costs. Head count sports at the top of D1 give every one the same scholarship. And you don't HAVE to go to college if a full scholarship isn't enough for you. I have no issue with the way the system is designed. That said, the NCAA members screwed up. Every time they had a chance to take the money, they took it. Hey, lets play more football games for money. Let's change leagues for money. Let's miss classes and play weeknights to get on tv for money. Lets require a donation to buy tickets, and reduce the size of the student section or put them in the upper deck while we are at it. Let's have special transfer rules for students who play a sport that are different from students in general. Let's require students to sacrifice academic opportunities - certain classes, summer internships, study abroad, etc for the privilege of playing a sport. We'll limit their athletic hours but not count travel and other time. I've said this before, but the answer to exploiting the athletes somehow became to pay the athletes who are being exploited. Nobody ever said let's stop exploiting the athletes and get back to making them student-athletes again. And now they have to find more money, cut spending, or get out of D1... FYI - the NCAA is cutting the time it takes for a school to join D3 from 3 years to 2 years. We'll wait and see what comes of that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2024 22:47:20 GMT -5
It won’t be sustainable for any league other than the SEC and Big 10. Pandora’s box is open and I say it all goes to sh&t unless congress steps in.
|
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jun 9, 2024 9:11:16 GMT -5
Players at the tip top of DI, which does indeed generate (substantial) revenue beyond expenses, do absolutely deserve a fair share in that revenue. And they’re already well on the path to getting that fair share. Athletes at all levels below that, which by and large don’t generate revenue beyond expenses, don’t have anything to share in. Those tip top DI athletes will get their fair share without having to kill the golden goose. A college charges the same tuition regardless of what major you are in. Most schools charge the same study abroad fee, regardless of where you are going and how much that program costs. Head count sports at the top of D1 give every one the same scholarship. And you don't HAVE to go to college if a full scholarship isn't enough for you. I have no issue with the way the system is designed. That said, the NCAA members screwed up. Every time they had a chance to take the money, they took it. Hey, lets play more football games for money. Let's change leagues for money. Let's miss classes and play weeknights to get on tv for money. Lets require a donation to buy tickets, and reduce the size of the student section or put them in the upper deck while we are at it. Let's have special transfer rules for students who play a sport that are different from students in general. Let's require students to sacrifice academic opportunities - certain classes, summer internships, study abroad, etc for the privilege of playing a sport. We'll limit their athletic hours but not count travel and other time. I've said this before, but the answer to exploiting the athletes somehow became to pay the athletes who are being exploited. Nobody ever said let's stop exploiting the athletes and get back to making them student-athletes again. And now they have to find more money, cut spending, or get out of D1... FYI - the NCAA is cutting the time it takes for a school to join D3 from 3 years to 2 years. We'll wait and see what comes of that. Lot of good things here to ponder. Time will tell, and perhaps not too much time required that that. |
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jun 9, 2024 9:15:51 GMT -5
Hasn't happened yet and the players have been getting paid for three years now. College sports are as popular as they've ever been. If the system can't survive without denying the players a fair share of the revenue generated by their labor it wasn't worth saving anyway. You hear this a lot. We pretty much lost college sports for a year. Some teams closed shop, others had social distancing in the stadium, limited schedules and canceled/forfeited games. We come back to NIL sports and people showed up "oh, look, the fans are still with us." Not because of NIL, but because everybody had stimulus money and wanted to return to go DO something. We are 3 years in and everybody - including coaches - complains about free agency, so now they add a playoff, and with realignment there will be lots of things we've never seen before to keep people curious. Next year there is a new financial model and we'll see how that unfolds. How will fans deal with the loss in traditions? Donors liked to get their name on buildings - will they keep paying for people? Fewer conferences means fewer conference championship races and more teams that are done sooner. Does the playoff add interest to the regular season or erode it? If they expand the NCAA basketball tournament does that help or hurt? I'd give it a few more years before I call this one. I'm not sure that the fans aren't going to fade away. We have plenty of evidence that Americans just don't care about minor league sports. College sports isn't going to die overnight, but we'll see how it's going in a few years. As you say, we'll see.
I think the true red line is no longer requiring players to be students and getting rid of the eligibility window.
|
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jun 9, 2024 9:22:24 GMT -5
Players at the tip top of DI, which does indeed generate (substantial) revenue beyond expenses, do absolutely deserve a fair share in that revenue. And they’re already well on the path to getting that fair share. Athletes at all levels below that, which by and large don’t generate revenue beyond expenses, don’t have anything to share in. Those tip top DI athletes will get their fair share without having to kill the golden goose. A college charges the same tuition regardless of what major you are in. Most schools charge the same study abroad fee, regardless of where you are going and how much that program costs. Head count sports at the top of D1 give every one the same scholarship. And you don't HAVE to go to college if a full scholarship isn't enough for you. I have no issue with the way the system is designed. That said, the NCAA members screwed up. Every time they had a chance to take the money, they took it. Hey, lets play more football games for money. Let's change leagues for money. Let's miss classes and play weeknights to get on tv for money. Lets require a donation to buy tickets, and reduce the size of the student section or put them in the upper deck while we are at it. Let's have special transfer rules for students who play a sport that are different from students in general. Let's require students to sacrifice academic opportunities - certain classes, summer internships, study abroad, etc for the privilege of playing a sport. We'll limit their athletic hours but not count travel and other time. I've said this before, but the answer to exploiting the athletes somehow became to pay the athletes who are being exploited. Nobody ever said let's stop exploiting the athletes and get back to making them student-athletes again. And now they have to find more money, cut spending, or get out of D1... FYI - the NCAA is cutting the time it takes for a school to join D3 from 3 years to 2 years. We'll wait and see what comes of that. I mean, chasing money has made the student athlete experience monumentally better at Georgia than at Georgia Southern. Chasing money has allowed volleyball teams to charter flights to every match rather than sit on bus for 5 hours. And the NCAA isn’t the one requiring athletes to sacrifice academic opportunities. Those are the individual coaches (and to some degree, the athletes). The NCAA protects that the best they can because I’m not sure you can create a rule that says summer open gyms aren’t allowed. Or a way to stop a coach from saying “we practice from 12-3. I guess if you have to miss practice for class you can, but you might develop slower and get beat out for a starting spot”. |
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jun 9, 2024 10:31:09 GMT -5
Hasn't happened yet and the players have been getting paid for three years now. College sports are as popular as they've ever been. If the system can't survive without denying the players a fair share of the revenue generated by their labor it wasn't worth saving anyway. You hear this a lot. We pretty much lost college sports for a year. Some teams closed shop, others had social distancing in the stadium, limited schedules and canceled/forfeited games. We come back to NIL sports and people showed up "oh, look, the fans are still with us." Not because of NIL, but because everybody had stimulus money and wanted to return to go DO something. But we didn't lose DI sports for a year, certainly not the ones people watch. Every championship was held in the 2020-2021 school year. It looked weird as hell for a lot of programs, but it still happened. The good coaches adjust. The smart programs have already changed how they operate under the portal (which has been around for *six* years now) and the sophisticated schools are very ready to move their NIL operations in house. What traditions have been lost? Did Clemson stop running down their stupid hill? Did Wisconsin get rid of Jump Around? Did NIL cancel Homecoming? Some rivalries have been disrupted and I agree realignment sucks hard, but the day to day experience for fans continues on pretty much the same. Donors can still put their name on buildings- I know a guy who just did that while pumping mid-six figures a year into NIL because 1) he cares about the football team and 2) he's wealthy. I don't buy the argument college sports under an employment model is going to be treated like minor league sports by fans. They're already paying the players through NIL (the fact it was happening under the table for decades in men's basketball notwithstanding) and college sports are as popular as they have ever been. College isn't the minors because the colleges have built massive brands with huge affinity communities and millions of built in fans. The minors have never had that and never tried to cultivate that because it isn't the reason for their existence. |
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jun 9, 2024 11:44:28 GMT -5
Agree that the traditions lost have largely been rivalries and that that is because of realignment. Realignment is happening because of chasing TV dollars, which I would say is almost entirely responsible for all differences between college athletics today and in say 2004.
|
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jun 9, 2024 11:47:54 GMT -5
They're already paying the players through NIL The big issue I see with the logic you're using to support your view on things is this here. I think you want this to carry vastly more water than it does. Even when it's the University of Minnesota cutting a check to a volleyball player (for the right to use her NIL), instead of Dinkytown Athletics (that's our "collective", a non-profit 501c charity if I ever saw one!!) ... that's still not paying a player. Paying a player means legal employment with a proper salary. That is not that. |
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jun 9, 2024 12:00:27 GMT -5
They're already paying the players through NIL The big issue I see with the logic you're using to support your view on things is this here. I think you want this to carry vastly more water than it does. Even when it's the University of Minnesota cutting a check to a volleyball player (for the right to use her NIL), instead of Dinkytown Athletics (that's our "collective", a non-profit 501c charity if I ever saw one!!) ... that's still not paying a player. Paying a player means legal employment with a proper salary. That is not that. Agents of the universities (coaches) are directing annual payments to athletes in exchange for playing on the team. That is what is currently happening in college athletics. They're already employees, just without the rights and legal protections afforded to employees. |
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Jun 9, 2024 12:10:39 GMT -5
Agents of the universities (coaches) are directing annual payments to athletes in exchange for playing on the team. That is what is currently happening in college athletics. They're already employees, Disagree that your correct assessment of what is happening then requires the bolded to be true. I believe you want it to be true. But until judges rule and the process has fully played out in court, it is not true. I’m rooting against it being ruled true. I’m rooting for new law, in this special scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jun 9, 2024 13:53:15 GMT -5
I’m rooting against it being ruled true. I’m rooting for new law, in this special scenario. Why. |
|
