Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

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!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues

GIF by Giphy QA
 
skibum said:
There are a couple of ways you can institute draft like equality without an actual draft.

You could have rolling signing days where teams can only sign 3-4 players at each date. Put that in place with a salary cap, and all at once the player that is 5th on tOSU's recruit list is much more interested in other schools' "first commitment day" offer.

I had some other ideas, but now I don't remember what they were...

But, truthfully the only way any of it really works in terms of a level playing field is with an enforceable salary cap.

And that requires a collective bargaining agreement.
Click to expand...
I have long believed that an early signing period with a very limited number of slots would help college football and the kids.

So coach Blank from Something State is telling a kid that he is the top priority recruit at his position. If that's the case why was he asked to wait while another guy at his position was signed? Meanwhile another school will sign him early and he will be the only one early at his position. Tells him what they really think.
 
skibum said:
There are a couple of ways you can institute draft like equality without an actual draft.

You could have rolling signing days where teams can only sign 3-4 players at each date. Put that in place with a salary cap, and all at once the player that is 5th on tOSU's recruit list is much more interested in other schools' "first commitment day" offer.

I had some other ideas, but now I don't remember what they were...

But, truthfully the only way any of it really works in terms of a level playing field is with an enforceable salary cap.

And that requires a collective bargaining agreement.
Click to expand...
The rolling signing day concept might curb some of it and spread the talent out a bit more, but there will still be Tier 1 and Tier 2 players that big programs will pay under the table to commit in any of those rolling signing dates.

As I said in a previous post, an enforceable salary cap in college sports is the same thing as "college players aren't allowed to get paid at all". Pre NIL, elite players just go paid under the table, even though that was against the rules and those rules were enforceable. Instituting a hard salary cap simply allows the players to get paid above board to a certain limit, by the schools themselves, and then the same rich donors/bag men can pay them even more under the table same as always.

Restricting the freedom of choice for players is the only way you truly bring everything above board and level the playing field. If elite player A doesn't have a choice and gets drafted by Colorado and is paid a relatively similar amount to what Alabama would pay him, no donors at Colorado needs to worry about paying him an extra $100k in a McDonalds bag to entice him to come here.

A draft is the only way to create true equality.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
The rolling signing day concept might curb some of it and spread the talent out a bit more, but there will still be Tier 1 and Tier 2 players that big programs will pay under the table to commit in any of those rolling signing dates.

As I said in a previous post, an enforceable salary cap in college sports is the same thing as "college players aren't allowed to get paid at all". Pre NIL, elite players just go paid under the table, even though that was against the rules and those rules were enforceable. Instituting a hard salary cap simply allows the players to get paid above board to a certain limit, by the schools themselves, and then the same rich donors/bag men can pay them even more under the table same as always.

Restricting the freedom of choice for players is the only way you truly bring everything above board and level the playing field. If elite player A doesn't have a choice and gets drafted by Colorado and is paid a relatively similar amount to what Alabama would pay him, no donors at Colorado needs to worry about paying him an extra $100k in a McDonalds bag to entice him to come here.

A draft is the only way to create true equality.
Click to expand...

A true salary cap also works, but *requires* a collective bargaining agreement that encompasses NIL.

Absent a collective bargaining agreement, nothing will actually work due to the court rulings that are coming down.

PS: a draft also isn't legal without a CBA.
 
skibum said:
A true salary cap also works, but *requires* a collective bargaining agreement that encompasses NIL.

Absent a collective bargaining agreement, nothing will actually work due to the court rulings that are coming down.

PS: a draft also isn't legal without a CBA.
Click to expand...
A true salary cap does not also work as long as players have the freedom to choose where they play.

And yes, I agree, a CBA is needed for a draft and everything else.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
A true salary cap does not also work as long as players have the freedom to choose where they play.
Click to expand...
Disagree - if you only have so much money to distribute, and other programs can also distribute that same amount of money, each team is going to allocate differently. But that's the thing, the guys willing to spend a lot must be limited and the folks at the bottom have to spend up to that much.

If you have a cap that only limits a handful of teams, then you don't actually have a chance.
 
skibum said:
Disagree - if you only have so much money to distribute, and other programs can also distribute that same amount of money, each team is going to allocate differently. But that's the thing, the guys willing to spend a lot must be limited and the folks at the bottom have to spend up to that much.

If you have a cap that only limits a handful of teams, then you don't actually have a chance.
Click to expand...
The schools would be responsible for the salaries in the salary cap. Donors, per forever, would be handing bags under the table on top of all that to entice players to come to their school.

Obviously, the salaries between school A and school B would have to be similar, but then it will just come down to the under the table bags because the players still get to choose
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
The schools would be responsible for the salaries in the salary cap. Donors, per forever, would be handing bags under the table on top of all that to entice players to come to their school.

Obviously, the salaries between school A and school B would have to be similar, but then it will just come down to the under the table bags because the players still get to choose
Click to expand...
You seem to gloss over a particular word: enforceable. You also are ignoring "inclusive of NIL."

You can achieve something closer to parity without a draft, but it requires, ahem - I'll write it very slowly for you this time:

an enforceable salary cap that is inclusive of NIL within a collective bargaining agreement.

Enforceability is the key, but one thing that really helps with enforcement is that the players are parties to the CBA - meaning the enforcement provisions can apply to them as well. It makes enforcement a whole lot easier if they are risking their actual school paid salary, benefits and playing time by taking "under the table" money.
 
skibum said:
You seem to gloss over a particular word: enforceable. You also are ignoring "inclusive of NIL."

You can achieve something closer to parity without a draft, but it requires, ahem - I'll write it very slowly for you this time:

an enforceable salary cap that is inclusive of NIL within a collective bargaining agreement.

Enforceability is the key, but one thing that really helps with enforcement is that the players are parties to the CBA - meaning the enforcement provisions can apply to them as well. It makes enforcement a whole lot easier if they are risking their actual school paid salary, benefits and playing time by taking "under the table" money.
Click to expand...
They've always been risking their college playing time/careers by accepting under the table money, that's my entire point. This notion that there'd be an "enforceable" salary cap is fantasy, just like there has always been a strict and enforceable amateur status pre-NIL. Elite players will still get large bags under the table to supplement their salaries because big time programs will always want to have that advantage.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
They've always been risking their college playing time/careers by accepting under the table money, that's my entire point. This notion that there'd be an "enforceable" salary cap is fantasy, just like there has always been a strict and enforceable amateur status pre-NIL. Elite players will still get large bags under the table to supplement their salaries because big time programs will always want to have that advantage.
Click to expand...
The way it has been is the way it will always be because nothing ever can or will change.


Got it.
 
Actually, snark aside, there is a reason why you would have a fighting chance to get the bag men out of the game: relative risk.

It's one thing to operate under the old regime where your options were "get nothing but room, board, tuition and football coaching" vs "kinda sorta risk your playing status by getting some cash under the table."

It's a whole different kettle of fish where your options are "get room, board, tuition and football coaching, plus a quite substantial salary package that you don't have to hide from anyone" or "get a less substantial salary package plus some money that you have to help everyone actively hid while also risking your playing status."

It really is a different risk situation and it would generate a different result.
 
skibum said:
The way it has been is the way it will always be because nothing ever can or will change.


Got it.
Click to expand...
Things will change when player movement is restricted and they no longer have the freedom of choice. This idea of an "enforceable salary cap" is fantasy and you have not made a compelling argument as to why that will all of the sudden create parity and stop under the table payments. If a governing body is going to restrict how much a school can pay a player, big programs with resources will work around that by... wait for it... paying said players under the table just like they've always done.

I don't know why this is a controversial take to you.
 
Having been to a few UHouston games, I can say their game days are a really sad affair. There isn’t much tailgating because it’s in a really dodgy neighborhood. Their stadium feels soulless and quiet. Concessions are hamburger, hot dog, chicken strip types of fare. Everyone feels like they’re trying hard to feel like they’re really into without much success. Mind you this was during winning seasons too, the kind Buff fans would have sacrificed a testicle over.
 
J.R. Ewing said:
Having been to a few UHouston games, I can say their game days are a really sad affair. There isn’t much tailgating because it’s in a really dodgy neighborhood. Their stadium feels soulless and quiet. Concessions are hamburger, hot dog, chicken strip types of fare. Everyone feels like they’re trying hard to feel like they’re really into without much success. Mind you this was during winning seasons too, the kind Buff fans would have sacrificed a testicle over.
Click to expand...
For the record, I am still willing to sacrifice your other testicle for a winning season
 
This under the table stuff can be ended if the new College Football structure has all the necessary things like Player Union, Revenue Sharing, Salary Cap, Operational Units, Congressional approval of Anti-Trust and real NIL/Social Media profitability, and Player Performance bonuses, and finally……. Real governance that can penalize under the table.
 
4BienemyTDs said:
This under the table stuff can be ended if the new College Football structure has all the necessary things like Player Union, Revenue Sharing, Salary Cap, Operational Units, Congressional approval of Anti-Trust and real NIL/Social Media profitability, and Player Performance bonuses, and finally……. Real governance that can penalize under the table.
Click to expand...
Yep. I've never once heard of a scandal in pro sports where a player accepted money under the table from a fan to sign some place as a free agent.
 
Buffnik said:
Yep. I've never once heard of a scandal in pro sports where a player accepted money under the table from a fan to sign some place as a free agent.
Click to expand...
When players are signing eight and nine figure contracts in professional sports, on top of multi million dollar endorsement deals, a few thousand dollars that a fan can afford isn't going to move the needle, but yeah, besides that it's a totally comparable situation.
 
Couldn't help but notice that privates are left out of that chart. Not sure that we would be ahead of Bringem Young.
 
FlaBuff said:
They have fans?
Click to expand...

Haven’t seen anyone with a CSU sticker on their car or t-shirt in awhile. Blame Coach Prime for that and at one Dick’s in the west Denver area, there were like 20 racks for the Buffs and just one for csu.

If they haven’t built that stadium, they might have been exploring dropping football by then.
 
skibum said:
Actually, snark aside, there is a reason why you would have a fighting chance to get the bag men out of the game: relative risk.

It's one thing to operate under the old regime where your options were "get nothing but room, board, tuition and football coaching" vs "kinda sorta risk your playing status by getting some cash under the table."

It's a whole different kettle of fish where your options are "get room, board, tuition and football coaching, plus a quite substantial salary package that you don't have to hide from anyone" or "get a less substantial salary package plus some money that you have to help everyone actively hid while also risking your playing status."

It really is a different risk situation and it would generate a different result.
Click to expand...

I just don't see how under the table payments can be enforced. It was undoubtedly happening a lot more then anyone realizes even when the NCAA was actually doing their job. Yak is right, restricting player movement will eliminate all this except for when players are being recruited out of high school.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top