This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I strongly disagree. There needs to be rules and an oversight committee.
I’m drifting this way and I’m sad about it. I’ll probably have the NCG on tonight, but won’t really be paying attention. I can hardly even tell you the names of CU’s players, much less anyone else in college football.
What in TF do you mean by a "feel good college degree"?!?!?!?
The Bowl Coalition started it, the BCS exacerbated it. The CFP was closer to the final nail.
Why don't you follow FCS then?
The NCAA and people like DBT (and others) hid behind the “but they get their degree paid for” as an excuse not to share any of the billions of dollars that were earned solely off the players sweat equity. It made everyone “feel good” about not paying them commensurate with their value because “they should just be happy with getting their degree for free”.
This is a horrible take.
If you do away with 98.4% of the rosters, FBS won't be a product worth near as much as it is now.
I don’t disagree, but that doesn’t have anything to do with the lack of revenue sharing.
Agree. I'm of the opinion maybe we shouldn't upend the entire system just for the elite 0.1% of players.
What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with the elite .1% of players. What don’t you understand about the fact that the NCAA, networks, universities, ADs and coaches have all been major benefactors of CFB becoming a multi billion dollar business, and none of the players, from the top nfl prospects down to the walk on scout team players, have seen a dime of that money?
The players have been paid in scholarships.
That you believe scholarships are commensurate with their value. This is at the crux of the entire debate going back years and you’re still of the opinion that scholarships are FMV for players of multi billion dollar leagues? Insane
And they still aren’t. None of these so-called NIL deals are coming out of AD budgets. Except for the redirection of donations in some cases (so the money never enters the AD budget)
For Caleb Williams, no, the scholarship isn't. For ~99.9% of college athletes, it is (open minded to a data based debate if you really disagree on that).
Right, which is why I believe there needs to be revenue sharing from the conferences/universities, but apparently that’s a horrible take because… college degree and all that.
Who are you to say what college players can and can’t demand? Who are you to say what the players are worth and whether a scholarship worth $20-$40k/year in education is enough compensation?
While networks and merchandizers cash in...
Yeah. College football was a sport built on true amateurism before the days of massive tv contracts. Once it became a massive commercial success, the model immediately became unsustainable.
Here's the disconnect. College football players' value does not come from their likelihood to be drafted and contribute as pros. It comes from their ability to contribute to wins at the college level, in order to feed the appetites of wealthy boosters and college communities. This system is entirely the result of the collective institutions decision to feed and capitalize on the value of their fans' insatiable desire to win.
Yeah, I think much of people's discomfort with granting players the agency and power to negotiate for a share of the revenue is that it makes us realize that we're feeding a financial behemoth that leaves most of the kids with some combination of torn ACLs, concussions, and 105 credit hours that don't quite all fit into the requirements of any meaningful degree.
I can't get behind limiting transfers.
The “system” you are taking about ruining was inherently flawed and unfair, specifically to benefit those who got all the billions. A scholarship is not worth nothing, but it was a bare minimum offer to get players to come play at a school. (There have been under the table deals for decades—you can look at it as even the “market” reflected there was more “value” than was being “paid” by mere scholarships; but the “system” made that illegal, til recently—and now we are seeing just how much “value” players were being denied.)
I don't care about any of those teams. I don't watch football just to watch football.
I don't know anything about the NFL, but I get the sense that players are bound by contracts, and that maybe teams have salary caps. I'm trying to understand why they did that and what benefit it brings to the sport.
From that perspective, I'd say the players should be locked in for a long as the money is guaranteed.
If the players want to be paid employees, then the contracts need to be binding, teams can release the players at any point, cap on NIL/spending, etc. The players do NOT really want a union.
