End of NCAA College Football?

southernoregonhusker said:
Gotcha.  What kills me about this subject is seeing Mark Emmert, the head of the NCAA, say they can't pay the kids while he makes around 2 million a year.  
Click to expand...
They're getting a free education, room and board, and training facilities. The only other deal you're going to find like that is in the military, and you still don't get all those perks. Should Generals and CEO be compensated the same as privates and new hires?

 
Mavric said:
@zeWilbur really interesting numbers.  +1

However, I'm going to assume that they won't be factoring the difference in the cost of tuition into the calculation.  My guess is it will be tuition, room, board - which will vary by school but be considered "equal" in the formula - and then some stipend calculation that would be the same across whatever scope is being considered.  I would hope it would be the same across all Division 1 schools - or at least all Power 5 schools.  That is what would be best for keeping the playing field as level as possible and thus be best for the game at large (and other sports as well).  If it gets to where it's only the same within each conference - or worse, that every school gets to set it - it will be a complete arms race cluster.

The NFL is the most competitive league because they have a hard salary cap that keeps the talent fairly spread out.  MLB is the least competitive league because teams can basically spend whatever they want so a few teams are pretty good most years and a few teams have little chance because they can't spend what the big boys can.  I'd much rather have a system similar to the NFL than MLB for the good of the sport.
Click to expand...


That is where I keep getting stuck. Every direction seems to lead to an arms race cluster. A single NCAA football tv contract would make redistribution MUCH simpler and more stable. Inherently evil, but simpler.

Wouldn't additional scholarship restriction do more to mirror the NFL distributed talent model than trying to keep yet another school from building an indoor waterfall that doesn't guarantee a kid will go there instead of the waterfall-free facility?

 
southernoregonhusker said:
Gotcha.  What kills me about this subject is seeing Mark Emmert, the head of the NCAA, say they can't pay the kids while he makes around 2 million a year.  
Click to expand...


Ah, the classic class-warfare example.

Would it make you feel better if he was making $50,000 per year and the remaining $1,999,950 was divided among the 179,200 student-athletes so they each got an extra $11.16?

 
If you are going to pay the players, there won't be any more 'walk ons' etc.   All athletes would have to be treated equally and compensated the same way or the litigation would never end until the entitre system collapsed.   Once you go any further down the road away from amateur athletics, it really becomes a professional 'business' only.   Most schools can't afford to operate lesser athletics programs than the 'average' and any system that would require massive increases of the schools' costs (paying the athletes a salaray obviously), will reduce the numbers of participants dramatically.   If you don't drop specific sports/programs, then you have to cut the number of athletes.   You'd likely end up with rosters cut to something like the NFL teams at most.

  I would expect a third to half the colleges currently offering athletics programs would drop them entirely and focus on academics things.   Without the collegiate level of many sports as an attraction, high school sports participation and interest would likely continue to decline and ultimately be ended as well.  I'm not sure how many NFL and or major league baseball stadiums are routinely 'sold out' for the season, but I would guess less than 75%.  That is a very small number of programs with literally a few thousand potential athletes to participate.   Sports was never intended to be a profession or career but something to do for fun and leisure activity for both the players and the fans.  

If indeed the players become employees as paid performers beyond the scholarship aspects, there seems little chance that many sports will survive in the long term.  Nebraska is one of only a relative handful of colleges able to 'sell out' a large venue to generate revenue to support the cost and operations, etc.   Big discussions are had on the board frequently about the continuity of the sell out streak.   When NU fans fill up a large share of the seats at away games for a number of our non-con and conference games, I dare say that raising ticket prices another $35 a seat will not increase attendance.    How many Iowa State Cyclone fans will pay $80 bucks a seat to attend a football game or $50 for a women's gymnastics meet?   Not nearly enough to support the programs.   These are top programs, not the Bethune Cookmans and Eastern Carolinas and New Mexico States, etc.  

Paying players is financially impossible in my view and once a "stipend" or salary is more apt is set initially, it will then need to be raised regularly for COLA, etc.   Won't work.  

 
Mavric said:
They're getting quite a bit more than room and board.

Since you brought up the NCAA tournament revenue, that sounds like a lot.  And it is.  But - again - the pie gets split a lot of ways.  Even using the entire $1B number - which doesn't take any expenses out but is only one revenue source - and divide it among the 179,200 Division 1 student-athletes, that comes out to $5,580 each.  which is less than the stipend is right now.
Click to expand...


Then factor in division II and lower and this gets very interesting very quick. 

 
husker98 said:
Then factor in division II and lower and this gets very interesting very quick. 
Click to expand...


Yeah, I'm not sure how that would work.  On one hand, they would have a similar argument.  On the other hand, the vast majority of the TV money and other such revenue is being generated by Division 1 schools.  So I think there would be a pretty solid argument that it wouldn't have to be the same across all divisions.  And you could probably make the same argument about the difference between the Power 5 and Group of 5 conferences ... in football anyway.

 
Lets do small steps at a time. Instead of coming out and paying with a check, as they already do get free education (Remember the days when that was a real nice luxury) how about they are given free insurance.

That isn't a bad deal. 

-Free education

-Free room and board

-Free insurance during your years as an athlete.

 
southernoregonhusker said:
Nah, those kids shouldn't get paid.

"The NCAA Tournament will be broadcast on CBS/Turner through 2032. The companies signed an eight-year, $8.8 billion extension with the NCAA for the broadcast rights to March Madness, putting the tournament's yearly TV value at over a billion dollars for the first time.

In 2010, the NCAA and CBS/Turner agreed to a 14-year, $10.8 billion deal that will run through 2024. Apparently the parties liked that deal so much, they didn't even get halfway through their initial deal before a huge multibillion dollar extension."

Yep, you read that right.  TV money from March Madness is worth a billion dollars a  year.
Click to expand...
This makes me think it is going to take a lot of ad revenue to justify that, so get ready for even more commercials.  Personally, I wonder when most folks will just tune out.  I have already gotten to that point.  I've got over 150 channels, smart TV, movies and kids to go outside and play with.  I don't have to try and stomach the 2018 Ad pack.  

 
It's not going away completely, at least not as long as any of us are alive I think.

I could conceivably seeing it shrinking though gradually..... maybe going from 125 in FBS down to 70 or 80 or something.

 
ZRod said:
They're getting a free education, room and board, and training facilities. The only other deal you're going to find like that is in the military, and you still don't get all those perks. Should Generals and CEO be compensated the same as privates and new hires?
Click to expand...
Is the military making billions of dollars?  Also, the players are responsible for the "product" in college sports.  They should share in the profits from the product.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top