Search results

If they do what you are talking about, they will be Michigan State/Purdue from this season in perpetuity. This team is currently competitive. In a good year, they could potentially be on the cusp of the CFP. In a bad year, they will be in a bottom end bowl.

Counterpoint: Dante Moore gets hurt and Raiola left hand flip passes the Ducks out of the CFP.

So, you want to chop the bread winner for the department off at the knees and hope the same amount of revenue keeps rolling in… If you spend significantly less than the rest of the B1G you will not be competitive. This isn’t a spend x dollars less lose two more games. It’s spend x dollars less...

If worried about the likelihood of athletes signing non-competes, why would they agree to buyouts that hurt? Also, what does “make the buyout hurt” look like? Miami just paid $10 million to poach Mensah.

Sure, I’d love to get into that discussion. Tell me how they get to contracts that are enforceable and stop free agency from occuring 24/7/365.

I think part of the difference between coach and player contracts is that it’s extraordinary difficult for a coach to join a team midseason but not that difficult for a player to join a team midseason. If it’s just a buyout added to the contract, what’s to stop a school from shopping on...

The athletic department spent $175 million last year. If every school sees the same p/l by sport as Texas outlined in the tweet above, it’s on football to make up that $100 million difference between total expenses and the media contract.

I’m pretty sure that these players are now contractors entering into contracts directly with the University with the introduction of revenue sharing.

Are you thinking it wouldn’t be enforceable due to the scope being too broad? What about a year long non-compete limited to FBS schools?

The point still stands. Football makes the money for the entire department. Texas spends a ton on basketball too and that team still loses money. If the football team sucks, the department budget won’t come close to balancing.

Ok, can players still transfer without repercussions if they miss the portal window?

Your original statement implies that football players are free to transfer at any time without any negative impact. If it’s true that players can transfer at any time outside of the portal window, I’m certain there are strings attached (I.e. sitting out a year). Additionally, NCAA athletes...

Ok… 1. Where did you find that? 2. If true, what exactly is the point of the portal window?

Do these contracts have non-competes in addition to the buyouts? Sure, you can leave before the end of your contract but you have to pay your buyout and sit out the year… I’d guess that would deter some of this movement.

It’s all changed now with the introduction of revenue sharing. The University handles all of the negotiating. It’s my understanding that collectives (if they survived) are essentially fundraising arms for the athletic department now.

Sure, a player can transfer schools without entering the portal but I don’t believe they can play on the football team if they do that. Honestly, who knows at this point.

Sooo… a player can “re-enter” the portal even though the portal was already closed and he started attending class? Whoever said there’s going to be a wave of transfers after spring ball despite the fact there’s only one portal window nailed it! The NCAA has completely given up enforcing anything.

Oh, it can get worse… As a Minnesota sports fan, you should know that already!

Spending less than their competition, likely ends up with them being stapled to the bottom of the B1G, PJ leaving and the stadium being half full. Thats far worse than 2 less wins.

I don’t believe Title IX is being applied to NIL & revenue sharing. Additoionally, MN is throwing 75% of their money at one sport. Thats the cost of admission for playing B1G football. If they don’t do that, they may as well fold up the program.