Author
Topic: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.
(Read 205634 times)

utee94 · « **Reply #1750 on:** September 18, 2024, 11:53:35 AM »

https://twitter.com/On3sports/status/1836044897226219684?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1836044897226219684%7Ctwgr%5Ee1515a94b7bef94606c102e3993ec091edb01e51%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.surlyhorns.com%2Fboard%2Findex.php%3Fapp%3Dcoremodule%3Dsystemcontroller%3Dembedurl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fon3sports%2Fstatus%2F1836044897226219684%3Fs%3D4626t%3DpEX-lbI-xuRrzvqCO5caGg

ELA · « **Reply #1751 on:** September 18, 2024, 12:33:36 PM »

I don't think they understand what revenue sharing means

utee94 · « **Reply #1752 on:** September 18, 2024, 12:49:53 PM »

Well there's a reason the vast majority of other sports at most universities are called non-revenue-sports. So if you're going to start paying the players, that money has to come from somewhere.

Only two choices-- start cutting non-revenue-sports, or increase the total revenue stream.

ELA · « **Reply #1753 on:** September 18, 2024, 01:21:15 PM »

Quote from: utee94 on September 18, 2024, 12:49:53 PM

Well there's a reason the vast majority of other sports at most universities are called non-revenue-sports. So if you're going to start paying the players, that money has to come from somewhere.

Only two choices-- start cutting non-revenue-sports, or increase the total revenue stream.

Yeah, so raise ticket prices, but don't do it this way and be like, whoops our operating costs have tripled in the past 20 years due to tv revenue, and we dumped it all into our own salaries and facilities. There is more than enough money already there, they just don't want to change. The Athletic podcast went over how Tennessee's athletic department budget has gone from like $70 million to $190 million in the past 19 years. Bloated staffs, skyrocketing salaries, and facilities arm races

utee94 · « **Reply #1754 on:** September 18, 2024, 01:27:18 PM »

I don't disagree, but the ADs are telling the fans, "This is how we must compete. Massive coaching staffs full of dozens of extra 'analysts,' massive spend on facilities, etc. If you want to beat Alabama and Georgia, this is what you have to do"

So they can't really back down from that, and they probably actually believe it, anyway.

Fans don't like increased prices no matter what, but they're obviously hoping that by signaling to the fans "it's just to pay the players, so we can beat Alabama and Georgia" then it will be more acceptable than raising prices to line the AD's pockets or something.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #1755 on:** September 18, 2024, 01:31:26 PM »

It's just PR.

It's like when San Francisco instituted a surcharge on restaurant tabs for servers. The reality is that it was nothing more than "raising prices". But it was "for the servers".

This is just raising prices, and trying to make fans feel good about it because it's "for the athletes".

utee94 · « **Reply #1756 on:** September 18, 2024, 01:32:55 PM »

Ed Zachary

Gigem · « **Reply #1757 on:** September 18, 2024, 01:35:42 PM »

Prior to the mid-2000's, most CFB coaches made less than $1 MM, and even the highest paid coaches only made $1-2 MM. I don't recall what AD's were making, but it seems like I don't recall any making much more than $1 MM. I want to say that we got Fran (shudder) from Bama for $1.7, he was making 1.4 at Bama.

You have to wonder, now that money will have to be allocated for all athletes, if we'll start to see salary and other non-player pay come down. I mean, $77 MM to Jimbo Fisher to NOT coach football, that would probably be enough money to pay ALL our players for years, including non-football.

ELA · « **Reply #1758 on:** September 18, 2024, 01:37:19 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on September 18, 2024, 01:31:26 PM

It's just PR.

It's like when San Francisco instituted a surcharge on restaurant tabs for servers. The reality is that it was nothing more than "raising prices". But it was "for the servers".

This is just raising prices, and trying to make fans feel good about it because it's "for the athletes".

Yeah, and maybe that's how it looks to people who don't follow it that closely. I kind of look at it the other way, "the courts are telling you you need to pay the players a cut of the revenue you already make, and instead you are making me pay it for you."

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #1759 on:** September 18, 2024, 01:41:13 PM »

Quote from: ELA on September 18, 2024, 01:37:19 PM

Yeah, and maybe that's how it looks to people who don't follow it that closely. I kind of look at it the other way, "the courts are telling you you need to pay the players a cut of the revenue you already make, and instead you are making me pay it for you."

That makes sense as well. At some point the fans are going to (each individually) come to a decision of "do I still want to keep doing this?"

And if enough of them say no, well, the title of this thread will come to fruition.

ELA · « **Reply #1760 on:** September 18, 2024, 02:07:39 PM »

Quote from: Gigem on September 18, 2024, 01:35:42 PM

Prior to the mid-2000's, most CFB coaches made less than $1 MM, and even the highest paid coaches only made $1-2 MM. I don't recall what AD's were making, but it seems like I don't recall any making much more than $1 MM. I want to say that we got Fran (shudder) from Bama for $1.7, he was making 1.4 at Bama.

You have to wonder, now that money will have to be allocated for all athletes, if we'll start to see salary and other non-player pay come down. I mean, $77 MM to Jimbo Fisher to NOT coach football, that would probably be enough money to pay ALL our players for years, including non-football.

During Greg Mattison's first stint in Ann Arbor (92-96) he lived up the street from us. Even as DC the last 2 years, his wife still worked full time, and he didn't make a ton. He even joked at least he got free tuition for his kids. When he came back as DC in 2011, lets just say he moved into a much nicer neighborhood.

Mdot21 · « **Reply #1761 on:** September 18, 2024, 02:51:06 PM »

can we talk about this killing the game too...Miami has a guy in his 9th year. Jawjaw's walk-on 2x Natty winning QB was like 37.

https://twitter.com/joewheat27/status/1835820559818768841

ELA · « **Reply #1762 on:** September 18, 2024, 02:58:02 PM »

Yup. I think they made a million stupid concessions, so long as they didn't have to pay the players, just to wind up paying the players, and now we are stuck with unlimited transfers and eligibility waivers.

Also

Get A Job GIFs | Tenor

utee94 · « **Reply #1763 on:** September 18, 2024, 03:31:03 PM »

Quote from: ELA on September 18, 2024, 01:37:19 PM

Yeah, and maybe that's how it looks to people who don't follow it that closely. I kind of look at it the other way, "the courts are telling you you need to pay the players a cut of the revenue you already make, and instead you are making me pay it for you."

Again, I don't disagree, but they've spent decades convincing the fans and the boosters (and themselves) that all of that stuff is necessary, to be in the budget. And they likely believe that themselves to a certain degree, or they wouldn't have done it in the first place.

And in response to the highlighted, I see zero implication that the courts are telling schools to pay the players a cut of the existing revenue. I can see why, as a fan, you might see that as a desirable or optimal solution, but the schools have no obligation to do that, and I have no expectation that schools are going to trim the budget rather than just increase the prices and increase top line revenue.

The schools are going to view it as having only two options-- cut non-revenue sports, or raise prices.

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

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

ELA

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

ELA

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

betarhoalphadelta

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

Gigem

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

ELA

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

betarhoalphadelta

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

ELA

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

Mdot21

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

ELA

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.