Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Marq... not a lawyer, but is there more of a civil case here, rather than a federal?

btw.. regardless of the outcome, I'm glad the FBI is doing this.   The NCAA needs to decide what they care about and pick a direction.

No, you are not. It depends on the group to whom you compare yourself.

You're an alum. I'm an alum.

Not every fan is that. And, in general, those are the fans who don't care about paying players based on the "million" conversations I've had with fans across the country, in my football travels.

Alums do care. Alums give money too. Like, the vast majority of it.

FWIW:  I am 100% with you and grillrat on this one.  
If they dropped amateurism rules I'm pretty sure my school would benefit more than most but it would destroy the idea of an even remotely level playing field.  
There are probably not more than a couple dozen schools with enough boosters to raise the kind of cash necessary to compete if it were just plain legalized as a bidding war.  Then you have a few more schools (OkSU for example) that might have one or a small number of boosters who might be willing to shell out a few million to get their school a NC.  Everybody else would be completely sidelined even worse than they already are.  

The US Attorney's Office (DOJ) can bring a civil suit , or it can seek a criminal indictment (usually by way of a grand jury).

The primary differences are these.
1.  A criminal case are offenses against the state (government).  remember victims (people) never 'press charges'.  The state or the government does this, sometimes against the victim's wishes (which may end up torpedoing the State's case).
2.. Burden of proof.  Civil actions have a lower burden (preponderance of the evidence),  Criminal has a higher burden (beyond a reasonable doubt).
3.  Punishment:  Only Criminal matters could result in the loss of a person's freedom, not to mention fines.  Civil, is either monetary damages, or a party stopped from doing something or forced to do something.
4. Criminal: right to trial by jury.  Civil, might have a jury trial, likely in front of a judge.
5. Criminal: defendant has right to counsel,  Civil:  no such right exists.
6. Defendants have much more constitutional protection in a criminal matter vs a civil matter.

The #1 reason this is a federal case is the nature of the alleged crime (wire fraud, and money laundering), and how/where the informants surfaced.   Could the US bring a civil suit against these people?  I suppose they could, I haven't really thought about that angle, and what their cause of action would be. 

You are bringing back lawschool memories!

thanks Marq for the clarity.    Health Law was part of the FACHE exam and while it focused mostly on federal acts, we also studied the difference between fraud and abuse.   Seems my memory was faulty on civil.. or it wasn't explicitly teased out and I assumed.  

I think playing players would lead to less competitive imbalance.  Right now, the top schools get nearly all of the top players.  If schools can pay, it would be too expensive to maintain that trend.  Certainly, the money rich schools would still have advantages, but not to the extend they have now.  

It would probably be more like baseball, where the top money teams still have clear advantages, but small market teams still compete but have less margin for error.

Looks like the NCAA will hit Arizona today, with allegations.