SEC/Big Ten Developing Plan to Share Revenue with Athletes
- Thread starter cycloneG
- Start date
Cincy would pay the same as Ohio State for NIL settlement. Not fair. How about the settlement is a % of the school's revenue? Ohio State has had athletes with more NIL and thus more damages from restricting NIL should apply to Ohio State.
Football, MBB, WBB, VB, SB, BASE are going to be your only survivors.
It stinks but embrace debate. Would we rather those sports pay and keep us in the highest level or keep track and field and play ball with the fcs?
Give me football, men & women basketball, wrestling and to even it out volleyball.
If no wrestling then bye bye volleyball.
Those sports aren't going to survive at the FCS level either.
Bowlsby flat said UNI isn't going to have golf, swimming, tennis, track, cross country and, maybe, wrestling in 10 years. He's been pretty blunt about that stuff since he's been in town.
I was talking about the level of football and basketball for Iowa state but yes I hate that those sports would be killed off at that level too.
IMO the whole damages/reparations is BS. Student-athletes since the beginning of time accepted scholarships knowing the deal. They got a scholarship which gave them the platform and development structure to pursue their professional dreams.
If the fans are on the financial hook, which directly or indirectly they will. I think a lot of alumni will be turned off.
Personally, I'd prefer 2 tiers of college sport with separate TV deals & championships.
If the fans are on the financial hook, which directly or indirectly they will. I think a lot of alumni will be turned off.
Personally, I'd prefer 2 tiers of college sport with separate TV deals & championships.
- Semi-pro where athletes are employees with scholarship, revenue sharing and NIL administered by university.
- Traditional model where athletes receive scholarship and negotiate NIL independent of school & its boosters. There are expense caps for each sport and AD net profits go back to university general fund.
Has FriendlySpartan been on yet to tell us how good this will be for all the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th rate conferences? I'll check back later.
I’ve been pretty consistent that paying athletes directly from the schools (and making them employees) is the death knell for college sports especially most of the non revenue ones for most schools
It’s burning to the ground. To not have wrestling etc will have a huge impact in high school levels. This just ******* sucks.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 41,263
- 29,656
- 113
We passed that point years and years ago.
And as far as damages/reparations go, you might think it's BS, but the NCAA is going to end up paying them. They're negotiating the settlement as we speak. Just a matter of time. They'll settle because they don't want to get beat in court. And they know they'll get beat in court.
I listened to Pete and Eric long before I went to a game or set foot on campus, I can switch back JW & Eric on the radio is how I take in most away games anyway.
I may drop down to the cheap seats first since I will have a kid there for a few more years.
This is the fundamental conflict happening, wrt competitive balance.
The big brands don't want to share equally with the smaller ones. And the TV folks would just as soon have those big brands and don't really care about the smaller ones. That's the pull towards consolidation. And so far that has been at the conference level, and the conferences (mostly the B1G & SEC) have been driving it to their own benefit.
But the next logical step is that it isn't the SEC or B1G per se that is driving the value. It's Bama, OSU, Michigan, etc - the big brands. For years it has been "why should we care about the Big12 or ACC?". But at some point, probably sooner than expected, someone is going to say "why should we care about Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Maryland, Mississippi St?"
Because the SEC doesn't drive the value. The brands do.
You know who will probably be the one to ask the question and start the self-destruct? Bevo.
I would guess the entire point of this - the $300M price tag - is to basically get to the superleague.
You throw this out to sticker-shock almost everyone, and scare then out of the room and discussion entirely. And you can say "we didn't kick anyone out, they left on their own" for plausible deniability in the murder of CFB.
So who can afford the $300M? Well about the top 20 brands that the networks want. What a remarkable coincidence!
The rest can drop down a level to something more like what college sports is supposed to be. Very much like what @isucy86 said above. Frankly, if there are 50-60 teams in the "New" college football, and OSU, Michigan, Bama, Texas are missing... who cares. ISU really wasn't competing with them anyway. And there is still plenty of critical mass, and there will be enough media money to make it all work.
I think it reinforces what I have been saying for years about this, but maybe that's confirmation bias.
