Proposed FBS Subdivision to Directly Pay Players

[I am I]

Players should get a stipend each year for living and spending. Concurrently a savings account which accumulates funds which are released upon graduation or turning pro or career ending injury.
 

 each consecutive year at a school the stipend goes up and the savings account gets bigger until they graduate, turn pro or retire. 

[JJ Husker]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I come to this number pretty easily. Other sports leagues - the NBA, the NFL, the NHL - all have their players form a union. As part of this union, the players negotiate a share of the revenue.

 

Using the NBA as an example, the players get 50% of the revenue and the owners get 50% of the revenue. Revenue is considered ALL money made, this includes TV rights, ticket sales, licensing agreements for jerseys, concessions at stadiums, parking, etc. Now, under the salary cap structure of the NBA/NFL not each player is paid the same amount. But you get the idea.

 

For a player at the University of Nebraska, the amount of revenue generated per year is approximately $110 million today. It's hard to say the exact amount, but consider $70 million in tier 1 TV money (the new deal just signed by the B1G). There's also tier 2 TV money via the Big Ten Network. There's bowl money, college football playoff money, Adidas money, ticket sales, concessions at the stadium, etc. All of this adds up and I conservatively guesstimate that the amount is probably around $110 million. In reality, it's probably higher than that.

 

Once you get to the revenue number generated, the CFB Players Union will likely negotiate a 50/50 split. That leaves $55 million for the school, and $55 million for the players. If each team has 85 scholarship players, divide $55 million by 85 = $647,000 per player, per year. This of course assumes a fixed rate per player (QBs make the same as the second sting punter) but you get the idea.

 

My opinion on the money they make is simple: if the market determines that the players generate this much money, then they are entitled to it. No different than you are with your company or I am with mine.

I don’t know where you work that it’s a given that the workers share the revenue 50/50 with the owners. I’d hang on for dear life to that job. And your calculations are not allowing for expenses of the owners so “revenue” is not in the ballpark of even the most utopian idea of what should be getting split 50/50. There’s a WHOLE bunch of expenses that keep the machine humming. Are you proposing that players equally share in expenditures also?

[floridacorn]

13 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I see that, but I think that unless the payments are raised significantly, football players are still underpaid? The amount they can make under this proposal is still limited by Title IX considerations. Until schools find a way around Title IX, which I think is only possible if football is privatized, the amount players can make is still much less than their fair market value.

 

 

Title IX was always the roadblock in attempts to provide player stipends.  The dam finally broke with a NIL solution coming from the outside and has been manipulated to simply pay players.  Now the NCAA is back where it started looking at dramatically higher figures, but pandora's box is open.  The price for doing nothing.  

[JJ Husker]

9 minutes ago, 307husker said:

I couldn't agree more.  

If they want to be minor league pro's, fine, but I'll take my eyeballs and $ to the NFL and watch the real pro's play a much higher level of the sport, with more parity and reasonable rules around $ and it's influence on the game.

College football was special based on intangible relationships between players, fans, and universities.  That's over.

Eventually CFB becomes minor league baseball.  Does any minor league baseball team produce 85k fans for 50+ years?  

Exactly. Except I don’t have any use for the NFL or MLB or NBA either and am not in the market for anyplace else to take my eyeballs. I like the NHL and used to like CFB. Not so much anymore. The only thing that keeps me hanging on as a Nebraska football fan is the nostalgia of it all. Pretty much already hate what CFB has become.

[Dr. Strangelove]

1 minute ago, JJ Husker said:

I don’t know where you work that it’s a given that the workers share the revenue 50/50 with the owners. I’d hang on for dear life to that job. And your calculations are not allowing for expenses of the owners so “revenue” is not in the ballpark of even the most utopian idea of what should be getting split 50/50. There’s a WHOLE bunch of expenses that keep the machine humming. Are you proposing that players equally share in expenditures also?

When I referenced your job, I mean you're paid fair market value. If you're the best computer programmer in the world, Microsoft or Apple will hire you and pay you what they think is fair. That might be $25k or $250k. Conversely, you are also allowed to unionize with your fellow co-workers. You can attempt to get 50% of the revenue if you wish, although you probably won't which is fine. It's all part of your unions negotiation.

 

With college athletes, they are legally bared from being paid from the University outside of stipends and they are not allowed to form a union. The difference between you and I and athletes is that they have much more specialized skills as determined by the market, and as such can attempt to negotiate for a higher % of the revenue earned. In the case of professional athletes, their unions negotiate for 50% of the revenue generated and they often get that money. 

 

As far as the expenses, that isn't the concern of the players. NBA owners get 50% of the revenue, and they use that money to hire staff, pay expenses related to their teams, pay for scouts, etc. Schools can attempt to negotiate for whatever they want as part of a CBA, I'm just telling you the current structure of professional sports and what a CFB players union - likely represented by the same people the NBA and NFL players union hires - will shoot for.

[Mavric]

40 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I see that, but I think that unless the payments are raised significantly, football players are still underpaid?

 

It's not just football.

[BigRedBuster]

43 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I see that, but I think that unless the payments are raised significantly, football players are still underpaid? The amount they can make under this proposal is still limited by Title IX considerations. Until schools find a way around Title IX, which I think is only possible if football is privatized, the amount players can make is still much less than their fair market value.

 

I do think that this proposal is a good start and schools are going to jump onto it as a solution - they don't want to share 50% of their revenue with players - but eventually the Supreme Court is going to rule that players are employees. And once they do the players will unionize. 

I disagree.

[PDXHusker]

3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I disagree.

The market dictates they are, doesn’t it? 

[BigRedBuster]

46 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

Of course I’m an older curmudgeon but this whole NIL, portal, pay the players thing is seriously turning me off to the whole mess. In just a few short years they’ve already ruined my ideal of CFB.

Agree.  Hey....they might change the entire system and everyone comes out the other side huge fans, the programs and players are making tons of money and everyone loves it.

 

However, for me personally, right now college sports have taken the worst of the worst part of pro sports and put it on steroids.  And...those parts of pro sports are why I've always liked college sports better.

 

Everyone else might absolutely love the product after all this is changed.  I'll need to decide myself.....and it's not looking really good right now.

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, PDXHusker said:

The market dictates they are, doesn’t it? 

What's the market?

[PDXHusker]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

What's the market?

What people are willing to pay for a player to play for their team/college.

[Dr. Strangelove]

7 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

It's not just football.

Football accounts for probably 90% or more of the average P5 athletic department revenue? I don't know the exact percentage, but I would imagine for big time college athletics it's a huge majority.

 

5 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I disagree.

The amount of revenue they generate is more than $100 million per year, and they are currently not able to unionize to negotiate any amount of that money. Collegiate athletes are the only people that are unable to unionize and negotiate for more money.

 

The market determines their value, just like it does for every other occupation. The market determines what a movie star, pop singer, or professional sports athlete makes in a year. The current rules structure prevents college athletes from getting any of that money.

 

We don't prevent art students from selling artwork, film students to act in movies, or students studying music from forming a band. Any of these students are allowed to showcase their abilities and let the market determine their compensation. Athletes should be no different.

[Mavric]

Just now, Dr. Strangelove said:

Football accounts for probably 90% or more of the average P5 athletic department revenue? I don't know the exact percentage, but I would imagine for big time college athletics it's a huge majority.

 

That's true.  But that's not what those numbers are representing.

[Dr. Strangelove]

2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

That's true.  But that's not what those numbers are representing.

I agree, my point was to illustrate the amounts of money college football players are worth to revenue sharing negotiators. Representatives from the NBA/NFL/NHL are going to tell players the dollar figure they'd likely see if they unionize, I'm trying to ball park what dollar figure that will likely be.

[gossamorharpy]

5 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

I'll take Common Sense Things the NCAA is Notoriously Late On  for $1000 Alex

 

RIP Trebek #legend