How To Fix College Football


Then they should have no problem publishing the contract numbers.
This!!

Hoping with the House settlement (money coming directly from the athletic departments, now) we can start seeing some FOIA filings on this stuff.
 

I think the solicitation of more NIL partnerships like the Cub Foods deal could actually be sustainable and a way forward. Regional consumer brands spend a ton on marketing and running a smart campaign with the local team might actually produce an ROI for the brand. I'm guessing it's only a matter of time before consumer brands dot uniforms and I'm OK with that. Being located in the Twin Cities might be an advantage from that perspective.

In contrast, I don't see how the whale booster NIL model is sustainable for most teams - ask Troy Aikman.

 

Did you mean to quote my post here, which was a reply to PE? I do not follow you
you said that the primary reason people watch college sports is because people are usually between 18-22 and are seeking bachelors degrees


One of the dumbest things I’ve ever read

The reason people watch college sports instead of minor league is affiliation with the university either via degree or geography.
If the G league guys were in college classes would they all of a sudden have large crowds? No
The university itself draws more eyeballs than the players.
 

I think the most impactful thing the NCAA could do to promote a more level playing field is to limit roster size to something close to 80. The current limit of 105 allows "richest" teams to buy 5+ deep (often 4 stars) at every position, leaving a much smaller player pool for the rest. Enforcing roster size would be much easier than enforcing a salary limit
 


I think the most impactful thing the NCAA could do to promote a more level playing field is to limit roster size to something close to 80. The current limit of 105 allows "richest" teams to buy 5+ deep (often 4 stars) at every position, leaving a much smaller player pool for the rest. Enforcing roster size would be much easier than enforcing a salary limit
Agree
I said this in about 2018

The way to have parity in a way that hasn’t already been eliminated by the courts is roster size

85 would be a number that makes sense
 

Makes you wonder why the NFL players did.

They sent it back for further litigation on a technicality, ie the relevant market was not defined which is required in antitrust cases. So, the player (and others in similar cases) could still win eligibility if they can prove the 4 year rule is an unreasonable restraint of trade.

Is it? If a student were granted 5,6,7 years of eligibility - as long as an enrolled student - does that harm the college football product? Applying the PE common sense rule I’d say no….but I’m open to arguments otherwise. If proven veterans had access to ongoing “employment” and NIL the costs would definitely rise even higher as their services get bid up versus bringing on unproven high school kids with less or zero compensation leverage that are just happy to be there and get a shot.

If, say, using an entirely made up and ludicrous example if Sanford Health conspired with other upper Midwest health systems to kick out, not rehire senior physicians or nurses after ten years employment in favor of new grads at half the compensation would that pass muster?
It is an interesting question, but I am not sure that the medical field provides apparent parallels.

If I were to defend the use of time limits in college sports - major junior hockey and independent minor league baseball are examples of paid environments in sports that employ year based limits.
 





Top Bottom