College Football 2022

[unclevlad]

2 hours ago, Grailknight said:

Well, the bar is now set. If this is what it's going to take for the 2nd and 3rd tier programs to compete, then I can see some schools dropping divisions.

 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/34264551/texas-tech-red-raiders-football-players-receive-1-year-25k-nil-contracts-matador-club

 

This is also going to be the incident that drives the NCAA to try to find a way to contain this.  Technically the Matador Club is not part of the university, but the gap between them can only be seen with an electron microscope.  Now, whether the NCAA *can* do much about this is debatable at best, and it's not because the NCAA isn't very effective.  It isn't but this is just very difficult to limit before you start violating free speech.  

 

Maybe drop divisions in basketball.  In football, I expect this will just accelerate the power schools splitting off from FBS to form their own self-governing body...and taking the championship, all the major bowls, and even probably half the minor bowls with them. 

[Grailknight]

I don't think the genie is ever going back into this bottle.

 

Saw today where Kiffin thinks there should be a max on player NIL's. Wonder if someone will fire back with tying it to a max on coaches' salaries?

[Iuz the Evil]

If you put $25k in the pocket of every scholarship player (80 scholarship limit) that’s $2M a year. Chump change for a major program, an incredible barrier to competitiveness for 2nd/3rd tier programs.

 

Really don’t love NIL. Is only going to accelerate the difference between the “haves” and “have nots” in the sport.

 

I don’t necessarily object to a more equitable payment system for players who put their bodies on the line for massive University television contracts, but this is pretty much turning into the Wild West.

[Grailknight]

Texas Tech is doing all 85 scholarship players and 15 "walk-ons". So 2.5 million.

[Grailknight]

After thinking about this, I don't see how this can be a bad thing in the long run. .

 

Yes, it will stop some schools from competing at the highest level, but those schools weren't really contenders any way for the most part. It doesn't hurt the other students at the school because NIL money cannot come from the school, it has to be collected and distributed by an outside entity.

 

The people who will probably have the biggest gripe are the professors. I see this 25K as just where it will begin but I can easily see all the Power 5 schools that are focused on athletics going to 75K or 100K or more. That's more than most starting professors earn by a good bit.

 

And I don't think Title IX applies because again, outside entity.  So a definite hierarchy of men's and women's sports will come back. This may actually result in more sports coming backto campus. One of the unintended consequences of Title IX was schools dropping sports to bring the numbers of men's and women's scholarships to parity(with an exception for football).  

[Cancer]

As a long-time academic and college instructor on the verge of retirement, everyone already knows I would like Division I athletics abolished in its entirety.  At the five different schools I've been associated with, it has in every one been a corrupting influence, actively detrimental to academic excellence.

 

Let the NBA and NFL run their own damned minor league programs, and stop sucking lifeblood out of the higher education system of the country.     Kill 'em all, and let Robert Maynard Hutchins sort 'em out.

[unclevlad]

22 hours ago, Grailknight said:

After thinking about this, I don't see how this can be a bad thing in the long run. .

 

Yes, it will stop some schools from competing at the highest level, but those schools weren't really contenders any way for the most part. It doesn't hurt the other students at the school because NIL money cannot come from the school, it has to be collected and distributed by an outside entity.

 

The people who will probably have the biggest gripe are the professors. I see this 25K as just where it will begin but I can easily see all the Power 5 schools that are focused on athletics going to 75K or 100K or more. That's more than most starting professors earn by a good bit.

 

And I don't think Title IX applies because again, outside entity.  So a definite hierarchy of men's and women's sports will come back. This may actually result in more sports coming backto campus. One of the unintended consequences of Title IX was schools dropping sports to bring the numbers of men's and women's scholarships to parity(with an exception for football).  

 

I reject this because the assertion that it's an outside entity is false, in practice.  On paper, yes, they're separate.  In reality...not even close.  Booster clubs buy access...many, if not most, big programs host a weekly lunch with the head coach.  Organized at least in cooperation with the football program.  Special events, player access...all facilitated by the school, for the boosters. 

 

It's also a fiction to assert it's not a recruiting inducement, IMO.  How can it not be?  A college degree is a pretty consistent path to a better overall income.  The downside is often that student loan debt is a big problem.  Yeah, well, full ride scholarship blows away the loans...but that's a given.  On top of that?  $25K isn't chump change.  And as you point out, this was the first offer, if you will.  It set the floor.  This story's from 2018, but it should still be on point overall:

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2018/09/11/college-footballs-most-valuable-teams/?sh=4656c46b6c64

 

For these programs, going to $50K per player wouldn't even be noticeable.

 

How can the promise of $50K per year NOT be a recruiting inducement?  You've got the nebulous value of the coach, his ability to bring out your talent, what your education is worth, at school A versus school B...versus 200-300K *in your pocket*.  And not just out of high school.  Given the current transfer free-for-all, schools with honkin' big NIL backing don't *need* to recruit transfers, the money will do it for them.  It'll be like MLB's haves versus have-nots at the trade deadline...let the little fish find the gems that were missed, then swallow them up.

[unclevlad]

Now, here's a more positive story about name and image.

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/anthony-richardson-ar15_n_62d53a2be4b0e6fc1a992037

 

Personally, I'd ask the coach if I could go with a different number as well.

[Pariah]

CBS sports ran an article today suggesting that the Big 10 may be looking at adding four additional PAC-12 schools: Oregon, Washington, Cal, and Stanford. The schools all fit the B1G's academic profile; the question apparently is whether or not they would bring sufficient additional revenue to justify their inclusion.

 

This would take the B1G to 20 members. Would the SEC then expand to follow suit? And who would they take? Clemson, almost certainly, but who else?

 

If it happens, and if Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado*, and Utah end up in the Big 12, what does that mean for Washington State and Oregon State? Probably the Mountain West.

 

And so it goes.

 

*Colorado's administrators are saying that they're not going back to the Big 12, one of them going so far to refer to that conference as "a JuCo league". But if other dominoes start falling, I don't see that Colorado has the clout to do anything else. Besides, as Vlad indicated above, watching CU crawl back to the Big 12 would be amusing.

[unclevlad]

A snippet from a few days ago, from that article:

 

Quote

UCLA facing political headwind

California Gov. Gavin Newsom wants answers from UCLA on its move to the Big Ten. Here's his statement from Wednesday, as reported by the Los Angeles Times: "The first duty of every public university is to the people, especially students. UCLA must clearly explain to the public how this deal will improve the experience for all its student-athletes, will honor its century-old partnership with UC Berkeley, and will preserve the histories, rivalries, and traditions that enrich our communities."

 

Of course, if Cal joined them.....

 

I'm not sure the SEC would care, quite honestly.  In the major mens' sports, those 4 schools are afterthoughts...at best.  Oregon had a few years under Chip...that's about it.  A 20-team conference is a joke, too.  It's impossible to have anything close to a legit champion, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the bowl committee took a harder look at overall schedules...the conference regular season champ might well have been gobbling Ding Dongs.  I'm also wondering if adding those 4 would be more *disruptive* than productive.  Travel.  Scheduling.  Fan disinterest...diluting classic rivalries.  Marketing issues...there's largely a Midwest focus to the conference now, but 6 West Coast teams...?  Ugh.  It'll be bad enough with UCLA and USC...if UCLA isn't blocked...but they have better reps and markets.  If they try to swallow all 6 West Coast programs, I wouldn't be surprised if they choke...and within a very few years, shed some schools.  Another issue with 20 schools is splitting the TV and bowl money in so many ways, that adding weak sisters definitely could be a net loss.

[Iuz the Evil]

If the SEC expanded, maybe Clemson? Probably not Florida State because of the long standing “gentlemen’s agreement” with Florida, but given the TAMU experience with the recent OU/Tx expansion I wouldn’t bet the company car on it. More likely not FSU because they’re not very good for quite some time and don’t have as much television/revenue to offer as they did 15 years ago. But maybe…

 

Gotta be big name or television markets. That conference isn’t even pretending that’s not the primary motivation.

 

Hmm. Interesting thought exercise. I don’t see the $EC adding anyone regardless of the moves made by the B1G unless and until it increases individual revenue shares. 

[Pariah]

Actually, you know what I would find incredibly amusing? Let's say the B1G does invite all six schools. I would love it if the very next day the Big 12 holds a press conference and says, "In light of the recent announcements in conference realignment, we are pleased welcome to the Big 12 Conference the University of Arizona, Arizona State University, the University of Utah, and ... San Diego State University. We had considered the University of Colorado, but they made it clear they weren't interested, and far be it from us to try to force their hands. These four fine institutions will join the Conference for the 2025 football season."

 

This would mean that CU, along with Oregon State and Washington State, would most likely be absorbed by the Mountain West. And that would have the Golden Buffaloes playing 'little brothers' Colorado State and Air Force every year.

 

I would laugh my freakin' head off if that happened.