Sportico article on how to fix college football

[Obliviax]

sportico is run by Michael McCann who is one of the leading minds regarding sports law. I've been following him for 15 years. If you want to see where "sports" is going, follow him. I attended a seminar at Harvard many years ago and posted on it. As far as I know, it was the first post on CTE. This was due to what I learned in this seminar (which spent half of its time on CTE). I think my predictions on college football (mostly, the lost civil cases) have been spot on. In this article, he advocates something I've said for two decades: give the kids access to education after their careers are over. They can supplement their college education or get a post-graduate degree. And this would cost the universities next to nothing.

Play College Football, Then Go to College

Imagine if college football players could pursue their studies without having to worry about football. It's possible, one player advocate argues.

www.sportico.com

 

[PSUMATT85]

sportico is run by Michael McCann who is one of the leading minds regarding sports law. I've been following him for 15 years. If you want to see where "sports" is going, follow him. I attended a seminar at Harvard many years ago and posted on it. As far as I know, it was the first post on CTE. This was due to what I learned in this seminar (which spent half of its time on CTE). I think my predictions on college football (mostly, the lost civil cases) have been spot on. In this article, he advocates something I've said for two decades: give the kids access to education after their careers are over. They can supplement their college education or get a post-graduate degree. And this would cost the universities next to nothing.

Play College Football, Then Go to College

Imagine if college football players could pursue their studies without having to worry about football. It's possible, one player advocate argues.

www.sportico.com

this just makes it a minor league, played at colleges. Don’t get it, but I guess I’m old. This has nothing to do with the college as an athlete

 

[LandoComando]

this just makes it a minor league, played at colleges. Don’t get it, but I guess I’m old. This has nothing to do with the college as an athlete

When hasn't it been the minor league for the NFL?
Players should have always been compensated with more than "a scholarship". Look at the money they help bring in to Penn State and all programs.
I think people are most angry because of how this could impact smaller sports that aren't self-sustaining.

 

[LMTLION]

this just makes it a minor league, played at colleges. Don’t get it, but I guess I’m old. This has nothing to do with the college as an athlete

What year/time period do you think cfb moved into minor league status? My guess is the 1980s.

 

[Obliviax]

this just makes it a minor league, played at colleges. Don’t get it, but I guess I’m old. This has nothing to do with the college as an athlete

well, the pendulum swings...and when you wait too long, it has way too much momentum to go the other way.

Universities exploited college football players for decades. This led to coaches making $10m a year, $70m annual profits and tons of second-rate athletes getting scholarships for box lacrosse and water polo while the kids suffered with injuries that only affected them when they got older.

It sucks for the fans but I get it and support the players. We need to encourage the players to unionize and then negotiate a reasonable collective bargaining agreement were college football is still a fun sport.

 

[LandoComando]

What year/time period do you think cfb moved into minor league status? My guess is the 1980s.

Agreed...maybe late 80s but it's always been a feeder system...see the draft

 

[PSUMATT85]

well, the pendulum swings...and when you wait too long, it has way too much momentum to go the other way.

Universities exploited college football players for decades. This led to coaches making $10m a year, $70m annual profits and tons of second-rate athletes getting scholarships for box lacrosse and water polo while the kids suffered with injuries that only affected them when they got older.

It sucks for the fans but I get it and support the players. We need to encourage the players to unionize and then negotiate a reasonable collective bargaining agreement were college football is still a fun sport.

I get it. Maybe it will flourish, but I think it tarnishes over time. If it becomes a minor league and nothing else with no real tie to universities, the market place creates a better model without the college.

 

[OaktonDave]

well, the pendulum swings...and when you wait too long, it has way too much momentum to go the other way.

Universities exploited college football players for decades. This led to coaches making $10m a year, $70m annual profits and tons of second-rate athletes getting scholarships for box lacrosse and water polo while the kids suffered with injuries that only affected them when they got older.

It sucks for the fans but I get it and support the players. We need to encourage the players to unionize and then negotiate a reasonable collective bargaining agreement were college football is still a fun sport.

As the sport moves to a purely professional model and higher education is facing increasing scrutiny and challenges, it is very likely that the value and suitability of university involvement in something disconnected from education will be questioned. Basically, the schools will become owners of minor league football teams. Why? Money? That assumes that fans will continue to have the same level of interest and revenue from ticket sales and media rights remains as is or increases, alumni will still make donations because of football, prospective students will still see the teams as a draw to the school, and the overall income from the programs will still be beneficial to the school after the salaries for players, coaches, staff and other costs are paid. It's a lot of assumptions, and I wouldn't bet anything I wasn't ready to lose that all of them will prove true.

 

[Obliviax]

As the sport moves to a purely professional model and higher education is facing increasing scrutiny and challenges, it is very likely that the value and suitability of university involvement in something disconnected from education will be questioned. Basically, the schools will become owners of minor league football teams. Why? Money? That assumes that fans will continue to have the same level of interest and revenue from ticket sales and media rights remains as is or increases, alumni will still make donations because of football, prospective students will still see the teams as a draw to the school, and the overall income from the programs will still be beneficial to the school after the salaries for players, coaches, staff and other costs are paid. It's a lot of assumptions, and I wouldn't bet anything I wasn't ready to lose that all of them will prove true.

yeah. the passion we see in college ball is due to the unifying love of alma mater. To me, that is what has made college ball a passion. Pro ball, to me, is simply entertainment. You can't tell me that JJ Watt wants to be in Pittsburgh, Garrett wants to be in Cleveland and Lamar wants to be in Baltimore. They are there because a) that is where they were drafted and B) is is where they can make the most money. Pro players really have no affinity to their cities but pretend like they do.

Without true love for one's college, the college game will suffer for me. I personally like people like CJF and Drew Allar. I like that they want to be at PSU. But those people are in the minority now.

 

[JR4PSU]

What year/time period do you think cfb moved into minor league status? My guess is the 1980s.

When did professional football start?

 

[JR4PSU]

I get it. Maybe it will flourish, but I think it tarnishes over time. If it becomes a minor league and nothing else with no real tie to universities, the market place creates a better model without the college.

It wouldn't survive without the tie to college. Unless you significantly shrink the number of teams in the league, the fanbase will not be there without the college tie-in. It simply won't have the same lure as College Football. Whether the athletes on the field are actually taking classes or not, the tie-in to the universities must remain. If you think about it, the primary reason universities have a team is for marketing purposes. Remove the college tie-in and the marketing for a specific university disappears.

I see nothing wrong with having universities contract players to play for them. Part of their compensation would be guaranteed tuition/room/board should the player wish to pursue a degree afterward. And with actual contracts, a lot of the team jumping that has opened up with the Portal would go away. You contract to play for Penn State, the contract says you stay for a minimum of 3 yrs unless mutually agreed to by the coaching staff and the player. You can only play for a maximum of 4 yrs over a 5 or 6 yr period in the league. Same as the currently eligibility.

I don't see why something like this couldn't work.

 

[LandoComando]

It wouldn't survive without the tie to college. Unless you significantly shrink the number of teams in the league, the fanbase will not be there without the college tie-in. It simply won't have the same lure as College Football. Whether the athletes on the field are actually taking classes or not, the tie-in to the universities must remain. If you think about it, the primary reason universities have a team is for marketing purposes. Remove the college tie-in and the marketing for a specific university disappears.

I see nothing wrong with having universities contract players to play for them. Part of their compensation would be guaranteed tuition/room/board should the player wish to pursue a degree afterward. And with actual contracts, a lot of the team jumping that has opened up with the Portal would go away. You contract to play for Penn State, the contract says you stay for a minimum of 3 yrs unless mutually agreed to by the coaching staff and the player. You can only play for a maximum of 4 yrs over a 5 or 6 yr period in the league. Same as the currently eligibility.

I don't see why something like this couldn't work.

And this is why a 48 team/2 conference format is perfect.
The Big XII/ACC/Pac XII should create a second level of about 60 (East/Central/West) using those "brands"
Then G5 is everyone else

3 playoffs--that will all generate interest. Especially the first 2.

 

[Parkland Fan]

It wouldn't survive without the tie to college. Unless you significantly shrink the number of teams in the league, the fanbase will not be there without the college tie-in. It simply won't have the same lure as College Football. Whether the athletes on the field are actually taking classes or not, the tie-in to the universities must remain. If you think about it, the primary reason universities have a team is for marketing purposes. Remove the college tie-in and the marketing for a specific university disappears.

I see nothing wrong with having universities contract players to play for them. Part of their compensation would be guaranteed tuition/room/board should the player wish to pursue a degree afterward. And with actual contracts, a lot of the team jumping that has opened up with the Portal would go away. You contract to play for Penn State, the contract says you stay for a minimum of 3 yrs unless mutually agreed to by the coaching staff and the player. You can only play for a maximum of 4 yrs over a 5 or 6 yr period in the league. Same as the currently eligibility.

I don't see why something like this couldn't work.

Over the years I have probably posted a dozen times to advocate for minor league football. Now that the portal and NIL have arrived, I am even more of an advocate.

As for the proposition that the colleges can "professionalize" football - our legal system is not set up for that. You can only unionize employees, not students. Yes, grad students who teach can be unionized, but they are also paid employees as well as on grants.

As for the college taking over ownership of a minor league team - again our legal system makes that very difficult. Large universities are non-profits and as such, they are exempt from a wide range of taxes. Can you imagine the local property taxes if there was a large profit making program affiliated with a university? I worked in the administration at Lehigh University. We had a bookstore, a very good restaurant/cafeteria and a golf practice facility, all open to the public. But it was never advertised, almost a Franklin level secret. Why? Because they did not want to risk their exemption from local property taxes by being perceived as competing with businesses that paid taxes.

So, the better alternative is minor league football. Make the NFL teams step up and align with a team. In the Lehigh Valley we enjoy and support the Phillies' and the Flyers' minor league teams, and they pack in the fans in. The athletes that are not ready for college could have a path to the NFL. And the athletes that want an education could still attend the college programs and have a path to degree and the NFL.

 

[OaktonDave]

It wouldn't survive without the tie to college. Unless you significantly shrink the number of teams in the league, the fanbase will not be there without the college tie-in. It simply won't have the same lure as College Football. Whether the athletes on the field are actually taking classes or not, the tie-in to the universities must remain. If you think about it, the primary reason universities have a team is for marketing purposes. Remove the college tie-in and the marketing for a specific university disappears.

I agree with you for the most part, but my reaction to whether or not it would survive without the colleges is "so what?" The NFL could/would create a true minor league, perhaps in partnership with the merged USFL/XFL, an existing minor professional football league. The model wouldn't be significantly different from what MLB and the NHL currently use. Athletes with no interest could skip college and go to the minor league and those who weren't sure could go to college, play for as long as they like and the professional CBAs allow, and move to either the minor league or the NFL as their talent and readiness allow. I seriously doubt that it would draw the interest that we currently see in FBS, but I'm anything but sure that football that is "college" in name only will draw the same interest over time, either. I have similar doubts about the marketing value for universities when the sole connection is ownership of the team by the school.

College football won't go away if we don't turn the players into employees and pay them. It will just look like it used to look when professional football opportunities and salaries were limited and like college hockey and baseball do now. The money will be less all the way around, but it will make more sense than putting schools into a business that has nothing to do with education and research.

 

[fastlax16]

It sucks for the fans but I get it and support the players. We need to encourage the players to unionize and then negotiate a reasonable collective bargaining agreement were college football is still a fun sport.

At the end of the day the gravy train starts with your customers, the fans in this case.

Can you think of a business/industry where massive changes to the business model sucked for their customers but didn’t ultimately impact the bottom line in a negative way eventually? I can’t but I’d be interested to hear about any examples that exist.

 

[gamblepsu]

As usual these suggestions follow the $$$ and the big schools/sports... Very little thought seems to be given to the majority of the NCAA athletes. D2/D3 schools and minor sports wouldn't be able to follow this. The small schools rely on athetics or fill their classes each year at the school and a much higher percentage of all students there particpate in athletics... Not to mention the 'bench warmers' of most mid size D1 schools would 'waste'years of getting a degree. How many would actually come back???

The focus (rightly so - I understand this) is on the athletes with the huge NIL contracts and those that get drafted in MBB or Football, but those are in the HUGE minority of all student athletes.

A REAL split from the NCAA between the big boys and everyone else needs to happen. Just look no further than the transfer portal. The transfer portal is full of these D2/D3 students and they don't have the $$$ (scholarship/NIL) cushion to fall back on... most people don't realize it affects ALL NCAA levels.

 

[PSUMATT85]

It wouldn't survive without the tie to college. Unless you significantly shrink the number of teams in the league, the fanbase will not be there without the college tie-in. It simply won't have the same lure as College Football. Whether the athletes on the field are actually taking classes or not, the tie-in to the universities must remain. If you think about it, the primary reason universities have a team is for marketing purposes. Remove the college tie-in and the marketing for a specific university disappears.

I see nothing wrong with having universities contract players to play for them. Part of their compensation would be guaranteed tuition/room/board should the player wish to pursue a degree afterward. And with actual contracts, a lot of the team jumping that has opened up with the Portal would go away. You contract to play for Penn State, the contract says you stay for a minimum of 3 yrs unless mutually agreed to by the coaching staff and the player. You can only play for a maximum of 4 yrs over a 5 or 6 yr period in the league. Same as the currently eligibility.

I don't see why something like this couldn't work.

That’s a lot of risk for a marketing relationship
As the sport moves to a purely professional model and higher education is facing increasing scrutiny and challenges, it is very likely that the value and suitability of university involvement in something disconnected from education will be questioned. Basically, the schools will become owners of minor league football teams. Why?

It wouldn't survive without the tie to college. Unless you significantly shrink the number of teams in the league, the fanbase will not be there without the college tie-in. It simply won't have the same lure as College Football. Whether the athletes on the field are actually taking classes or not, the tie-in to the universities must remain. If you think about it, the primary reason universities have a team is for marketing purposes. Remove the college tie-in and the marketing for a specific university disappears.

I see nothing wrong with having universities contract players to play for them. Part of their compensation would be guaranteed tuition/room/board should the player wish to pursue a degree afterward. And with actual contracts, a lot of the team jumping that has opened up with the Portal would go away. You contract to play for Penn State, the contract says you stay for a minimum of 3 yrs unless mutually agreed to by the coaching staff and the player. You can only play for a maximum of 4 yrs over a 5 or 6 yr period in the league. Same as the currently eligibility.

I don't see why something like this couldn't work.

Money? That assumes that fans will continue to have the same level of interest and revenue from ticket sales and media rights remains as is or increases, alumni will still make donations because of football, prospective students will still see the teams as a draw to

As usual these suggestions follow the $$$ and the big schools/sports... Very little thought seems to be given to the majority of the NCAA athletes. D2/D3 schools and minor sports wouldn't be able to follow this. The small schools rely on athetics or fill their classes each year at the school and a much higher percentage of all students there particpate in athletics... Not to mention the 'bench warmers' of most mid size D1 schools would 'waste'years of getting a degree. How many would actually come back???

The focus (rightly so - I understand this) is on the athletes with the huge NIL contracts and those that get drafted in MBB or Football, but those are in the HUGE minority of all student athletes.

A REAL split from the NCAA between the big boys and everyone else needs to happen. Just look no further than the transfer portal. The transfer portal is full of these D2/D3 students and they don't have the $$$ (scholarship/NIL) cushion to fall back on... most people don't realize it affects ALL NCAA levels.

Agree. In twenty years, I think you’ll see most of what is now D1 opting back to minimal pay model

 

[lazydave841]

If it becomes a minor league and nothing else with no real tie to universities

The school brands aren't going away. They are worth too much money.

 

[PSUMATT85]

The school brands aren't going away. They are worth too much money.

But maybe I’m different. But I am losing interest with minimal tie to the school, and it’s getting worse

 

[LandoComando]

But maybe I’m different. But I am losing interest with minimal tie to the school, and it’s getting worse

You're definitely in the minority--you're, like me, also not who they care about

 

[Ian]

When hasn't it been the minor league for the NFL?
Players should have always been compensated with more than "a scholarship". Look at the money they help bring in to Penn State and all programs.
I think people are most angry because of how this could impact smaller sports that aren't self-sustaining.

Why? Scholarships cost $200k that most regular people have to pay off. They get a free degree whether they play or not. They need to be employed by the university. Pure and simple. The rest is BS. NCAA is petrified by the prospect of unions. But you can’t make millions off of these kids and not give them a piece of the pie. Players should be assigned salary grades by positions and appropriate pay levels like all employees.

 

[LandoComando]

Why? Scholarships cost $200k that most regular people have to pay off. They get a free degree whether they play or not. They need to be employed by the university. Pure and simple. The rest is BS. NCAA is petrified by the prospect of unions. But you can’t make millions off of these kids and not give them a piece of the pie. Players should be assigned salary grades by positions and appropriate pay levels like all employees.

The scholarship doesn't come close to offsetting the money they bring in. They're getting the same pay as all other scholarships students. It's laughable.

If they actually cared about academics (which even at Penn State most never have) it would be a different story but they're here for football.

 

[bdgan]

well, the pendulum swings...and when you wait too long, it has way too much momentum to go the other way.

Universities exploited college football players for decades. This led to coaches making $10m a year, $70m annual profits and tons of second-rate athletes getting scholarships for box lacrosse and water polo while the kids suffered with injuries that only affected them when they got older.

It sucks for the fans but I get it and support the players. We need to encourage the players to unionize and then negotiate a reasonable collective bargaining agreement were college football is still a fun sport.

I'm an old fashioned guy who thinks college sports should be played by college students but I don't know how we can get back to that.

I don't even know how a collective bargaining agreement would work. Players unions could negotiate benefits like healthcare but what about salaries? If players demand a % of revenues there might not be enough money left to pay for non revenue programs. Would there be a salary cap? Would high school players get drafted instead of recruited? Would this only apply to P5 programs? Would players be tied to contracts and be prohibited from transferring?

 

[JR4PSU]

I agree with you for the most part, but my reaction to whether or not it would survive without the colleges is "so what?" The NFL could/would create a true minor league, perhaps in partnership with the merged USFL/XFL, an existing minor professional football league. The model wouldn't be significantly different from what MLB and the NHL currently use. Athletes with no interest could skip college and go to the minor league and those who weren't sure could go to college, play for as long as they like and the professional CBAs allow, and move to either the minor league or the NFL as their talent and readiness allow. I seriously doubt that it would draw the interest that we currently see in FBS, but I'm anything but sure that football that is "college" in name only will draw the same interest over time, either. I have similar doubts about the marketing value for universities when the sole connection is ownership of the team by the school.

College football won't go away if we don't turn the players into employees and pay them. It will just look like it used to look when professional football opportunities and salaries were limited and like college hockey and baseball do now. The money will be less all the way around, but it will make more sense than putting schools into a business that has nothing to do with education and research.

Any league set up like the USFL/XFL would have similar popularity, i.e. minimal. Without maintaining the college tie-in, any new “minor league” set up would die on the vine. The primary reason college football is so successful with over 100 teams is because of the built-in fan base of the universities with all the pageantry and history. Lose that and the league falls apart. All of the stadiums around the country rot. All the other sports will be slowly discontinued due to a lack of funding.

 

[bdgan]

Any league set up like the USFL/XFL would have similar popularity, i.e. minimal. Without maintaining the college tie-in, any new “minor league” set up would die on the vine. The primary reason college football is so successful with over 100 teams is because of the built-in fan base of the universities with all the pageantry and history. Lose that and the league falls apart. All of the stadiums around the country rot. All the other sports will be slowly discontinued due to a lack of funding.

Agree. This is why I disagree with people who claim the players make all the money for the schools. Of course fans want their teams to be competitive but if it was just about the caliber of players people would be flocking to the XFL instead of universities.

 

[LandoComando]

Any league set up like the USFL/XFL would have similar popularity, i.e. minimal. Without maintaining the college tie-in, any new “minor league” set up would die on the vine. The primary reason college football is so successful with over 100 teams is because of the built-in fan base of the universities with all the pageantry and history. Lose that and the league falls apart. All of the stadiums around the country rot. All the other sports will be slowly discontinued due to a lack of funding.

The 100+ teams aren't relevant. Most FBS fans couldn't name half of the G5 teams. Hell, many couldn't name every team in the SEC or Big Ten. The brand tied to the school is all that matters. You're being overly dramatic. See the ratings last night. Those people aren't going to vanish. You need to stop thinking of the people 50+ (or 40+) right now and focus on teenagers. We're not important.

And your real problem is the last thing you said. You know college football enables other sports to exist--it shouldn't have to.

 

[OaktonDave]

Any league set up like the USFL/XFL would have similar popularity, i.e. minimal. Without maintaining the college tie-in, any new “minor league” set up would die on the vine. The primary reason college football is so successful with over 100 teams is because of the built-in fan base of the universities with all the pageantry and history. Lose that and the league falls apart. All of the stadiums around the country rot. All the other sports will be slowly discontinued due to a lack of funding.

I completely agree that the popularity of college football is rooted in the tradition, history, and pageantry associated with it. My point is that many of the changes that are happening are eroding or have the potential to erode the very things that make it more appealing than a true minor league. The bowls are dead, and conference realignment has killed some rivalries and traditions. As the players are more disconnected from the schools the whole idea that they are playing for "Dear old State" becomes increasingly absurd. It's a job, and they are employees with little in common with the student body other than age and where they live. The idea that the players would act like it's their school and not their employer and students and alumni would act like the players see the school in a manner similar to how they see it doesn't make much sense. All of that goes to the unique appeal of college sports that differs from watching a game with paid professionals. Maybe having the college labels on the teams will be enough to get people to continue looking at it as they do now, I just have my doubts.

The players as paid professionals model will not work for all P5 schools much less the G5 schools. I have a son at James Madison, and, despite having outstanding support, I doubt they could run the program in the black if they had to pay the players an average salary of $75K plus medical and plus future scholarships for those interested. The revenue from a stadium that seats 25K and SBC media rights isn't going to do it. The model is only going to work for schools with a strong fan base and large TV contracts. If it goes as the article proposes, I think the number of schools involved will be around 50, maybe less.

 

[LandoComando]

If it goes as the article proposes, I think the number of schools involved will be around 50, maybe less.

48 seems about right

 

[NoBareFeet]

I hope a minor/development league is developed for all of these self proclaimed superstars who don't want to go to college and want to get paid to play right out of high school. Keep college football for college students. And NO ONE will watch the minor league, and it will die. And college football will thrive.

 

[OaktonDave]

48 seems about right

I think that's the starting point. After that, it will change as cost/benefit realities become clear.

 

[LandoComando]

I hope a minor/development league is developed for all of these self proclaimed superstars who don't want to go to college and want to get paid to play right out of high school. Keep college football for college students. And NO ONE will watch the minor league, and it will die. And college football will thrive.

Never going to happen--as you just said "no one will watch". Why would the NFL waste money?

 

[JR4PSU]

And your real problem is the last thing you said. You know college football enables other sports to exist--it shouldn't have to.

It doesn't matter if it "shouldn't" have to. It does.

 

[LandoComando]

It doesn't matter if it "shouldn't" have to. It does.

But it does matter because it may not in the future

 

[Obliviax]

I completely agree that the popularity of college football is rooted in the tradition, history, and pageantry associated with it. My point is that many of the changes that are happening are eroding or having the potential to erode the very things that make it more appealing than a true minor league. The bowls are dead, and conference realignment has killed some rivalries and traditions. As the players are more disconnected from the schools the whole idea that they are playing for "Dear old State" becomes increasingly absurd. It's a job, and they are employees with little in common with the student body other than age and where they live. The idea that the players would act like it's their school and not their employer and students and alumni would act like the players see the school in a manner similar to how they see it doesn't make much sense. All of that goes to the unique appeal of college sports that differs from watching a game with paid professionals. Maybe having the college labels on the teams will be enough to get people to continue looking at it as they do now, I just have my doubts.

The players as paid professionals model will not work for all P5 schools much less the G5 schools. I have a son at James Madison, and, despite having outstanding support, I doubt they could run the program in the black if they had to pay the players an average salary of $75K plus medical and plus future scholarships for those interested. The revenue from a stadium that seats 25K and SBC media rights isn't going to do it. The model is only going to work for schools with a strong fan base and large TV contracts. If it goes as the article proposes, I think the number of schools involved will be around 50, maybe less.

Agreed.

In the end, I think we'll see a new league of some type for the top teams. The college football world is quite different from teams outside the top 50 or so. They don't make a ton of money and the kids are not 5 or 4 star kids. A few make it to the NFL but very few and most of those do so as a very low draft pick or a free agent situation (so leaving early for the draft isn't an option).

I think we'll see some kind of unionization for the players as well as a national championship division. They'll negotiate a CBA that includes things like:

• portal options, openings, and closings
• portal restrictions (can't go to a competitor within X of the season)
• penalties for opting out of bowl games
• player salary caps
• healthcare, during and after eligibility for football-related injuries
• post eligibility access to education
• some kind of relegation if teams are not competitive
• changes when a HC leaves a program, how that affects players and portals

A ton more. NFLPA will probably get involved as well.

 

[JR4PSU]

But it does matter because it may not in the future

It does matter. Because it does. Change that and those other sports go away. Colleges aren't altruistic organizations.

 

[bdgan]

You know college football enables other sports to exist--it shouldn't have to.

So you propose football keeps all of it's own money and we eliminate other sports, including all women's sports?

 

[NoBareFeet]

Never going to happen--as you just said "no one will watch". Why would the NFL waste money?

So you are saying that these players are really nothing without the schools? (Agreed). And that the players owe a lot to the schools for the exposure, the coaching, the training, etc. that they get to prepare them for the NFL, if that is what they choose to pursue after college? (Agreed). And therefore these players aren't really exploited victims, but actually are very fortunate to be getting all of these things in addition to a free education? (Agreed).

So then what are we doing with NIL, transfers, and why are we bending over backward to appease these entitled kids??? Why did we let liberals ruin college football????

 

[bdgan]

Agreed.

In the end, I think we'll see a new league of some type for the top teams. The college football world is quite different from teams outside the top 50 or so. They don't make a ton of money and the kids are not 5 or 4 star kids. A few make it to the NFL but very few and most of those do so as a very low draft pick or a free agent situation (so leaving early for the draft isn't an option).

I think we'll see some kind of unionization for the players as well as a national championship division. They'll negotiate a CBA that includes things like:

• portal options, openings, and closings
• portal restrictions (can't go to a competitor within X of the season)
• penalties for opting out of bowl games
• player salary caps
• healthcare, during and after eligibility for football-related injuries
• post eligibility access to education
• some kind of relegation if teams are not competitive
• changes when a HC leaves a program, how that affects players and portals

A ton more. NFLPA will probably get involved as well.

I don't know how the portal fits with salaries/caps. It seems to me that a salary means a contract and players would be bound to the contract.

You suggest a player could leave if HC changes. The player still has a contract so unless you're saying players would only have 1 year contracts I don't understand how they could leave. If they have 1 year contracts it would be a free for all just like the current portal.

 

[Obliviax]

I don't know how the portal fits with salaries/caps. It seems to me that a salary means a contract and players would be bound to the contract.

You suggest a player could leave if HC changes. The player still has a contract so unless you're saying players would only have 1 year contracts I don't understand how they could leave. If they have 1 year contracts it would be a free for all just like the current portal.

I think schools will end up paying players, hence a salary cap.

I don't think the portal is going away but there will be additional restrictions. But those restrictions may be removed if a HC is fired or quits. My thinking is, what if you are a fullback and take a 'ship to attend a school where the coach likes having a fullback. He is fired and they hire JoeMo as HC. Open up the portal and let the kid go ASAP.

 

[LandoComando]

It does matter. Because it does. Change that and those other sports go away. Colleges aren't altruistic organizations.

Right--that's my point. Those sports will go away which is why you don't like this.
Football shouldn't have to enable everyone else to survive