That doesn't sound like corruption to me. It sounds like pure capitalism.
Bagmen in the current system are corrupt because they are against the rules. In a system that frees each player to seek their own market value, zero of that is corrupt/shady because it is explicitly encouraged.
In terms of pure capitalism, I won't be sad if the P5 were to further pare down because they don't trust they could compete. But that won't be a very popular opinion. So I'm back to the trusty angle from above: At least then it would be out in the open.
Pure capitalism doesn't work in sports. That's why every professional league has a draft, has a salary cap, limited roster sizes, etc.
The value of the product depends on some semblance of level competition. Otherwise in the professional leagues, the big-money markets would just pay more to the best players, win every year, increasing their payroll every year as they win more and more,
and then ratings would tank because nobody would think it's fair.Today, college football already has a HUGE natural imbalance, because there's no draft. You get players by recruiting them. That immediately gives a built-in advantage to the helmet teams over non-helmet, to P5 over G5, to G5 over FCS, etc.
Most of the changes we've tried to institute over the course of the history of CFB have been to try to blunt that. Scholarship limits is a huge example of this, because we don't want Michigan and OSU stockpiling all the best players in the midwest so that Purdue and Indiana can't field even remotely competitive teams.
If you start allowing uncontrolled money, you'll see that imbalance get worse.
And if it gets bad enough, eventually it'll destroy the sport.
