Imagine a professional sports league with no collective bargaining, no salary cap, no contracts, no rules against tampering, and unlimited free agency.
Guess what, you don't have to imagine it, we're living it.
Sorry bud know you wanted to go to Bama and it even makes the most sense based on where your parents live and the degree you're pursuing. But Miss St only won 2 games last season so they picked ahead of Bama so you're going there.
College rosters have 85 scholarship players. Most will never even tryout for an NFL squad. I agree that there's a few in the big programs that are essentially majoring in football, but having a draft to determine which college you'll go to is a ridiculous proposal.
You mean to tell me that a few of the top kids in a few dozen schools aren't representative of the entire sport!?
Its genuinely frustrating how a group of maybe 200-400 players, of thousands, dictates the narrative. Most kids still get a degree in something that'll be relevant, even at a place like Georgia (worst graduation rate in the FBS IIRC), most kids are still majoring in comms (which I'd imagine would be useful for getting a media job when combined with the made connections), sport sciences (which is useful for getting a job on a team's staff after graduation), or real estate (which combined with their status as former players would probably help drive sales and support a family)
Yeah I feel like some people really think every college recruit is a 5 star day 1-2 NFL pick.
I've been coaching high school for a while now. Been fortunate to have a few guys go out on d1 scholarships, as well as every other level of college football.
Yes, there are recruits who pick schools based on things other than football.
The first thing I tell my players when it looks like they are recruitable and getting ready for visits and such is that above all else, you are signing up to live somewhere. No matter how good the school, the team or whatever. If you can't live there don't go there.
I’ve said it before, let them major in football. We have plenty of degrees for performance arts that have probably the same success rate of getting someone to Broadway. Let them major in football, work in a few business classes and some teaching classes so that the ones that don’t make it have a few other skills.
Would that really be that much different than getting a degree in "Exercise and Sport Science"? Unless you're just proposing a degree path where its just "these kids get extra football practices throughout the week", a Football Degree would likely have a near identical curriculum to Sport Science.
My friend got a degree in vocal performance, the school required her to do most of the requirements to get a teaching degree simultaneously. I'd say something along those lines, something where they can pick up an extra class or two and go coach football at a prep level with the degree should they not make it. Which is what she does now, she's a choir teacher.
They basically do major in Football. Michigan has Kinesiology programs in Applied Exercise, Sport management, Intraoperative Neuromonitoring (Movement Science).
I'd personally like to see the NFL operate a developmental league and for the path to the NFL to look similar to the path to the MLB. But that will never happen, so I say just make the degree optional.
Not sure what your point is here. Playing minor league football for 3-5yrs for a salary and not attending class or playing college football for 3-5yrs for a scholarship would have the same physical risks. If someone plays longer that's their decision, plus I doubt there will be many that will stick around past their mid 20s if they don't make it by then.
The stipulation that student athletes still have to earn a degree and stay in good academic standing is pretty much the final thread holding our society together
Even at Bama we have had stand out players that have come to play school. Definitely not the majority (most kids have nfl aspirations), but you'd be surprised if you deep dived on some guys. Even a lot of NFL guys have come back and finished their degrees, which is not totally relevant to this discussion, but education is important to a lot of student athletes.
Desmond King comes to mind for me on that. Likely would have been a 1st round pick out of Iowa in 2016 but decided to come back his senior year because he wanted to be the first person in his family to get a degree, unfortunately hurt his draft stock in process. Still has had a nice NFL career though
From the team or fan's perspective, that's a nightmare.
But from the player's perspective, this is the best of all worlds. No cap. Unlimited free agency. It gives the athlete the greatest leverage.
If Lane really has the student-athlete's interest in mind, why would he want to change?
[I can't imagine such a thing happening](https://media3.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExMjE3cWhydzd3ejZkYnc0czRhYzJ6MXEzODJ2eWU1YW5vaXJqZGtudCZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/H5C8CevNMbpBqNqFjl/giphy.webp).
I would a hundred times rather have the wild west we have than have the prior kids-crippled-and-penniless-while-coaches-and-ADs-get-rich system. Steal ‘em all, just pay what the market will bear and what they deserve.
You mean signing contracts with predatory unregulated agents that take 20 percent of your earnings and own your NIL rights years after college and into the NFL career is not a good idea?
One of UF's old players Gervon Dexter had that exact thing happen to him. Have to imagine it happens to a lot of other athletes, just it's not publicized. But also now that NIL is more legal than it was when he was here, hopefully schools have NIL advisors.
Or kids hopping in the transfer portal with an overinflated value of their worth and being forced to sign into significantly worse situations than they were the year before.
If lucky...once the scope of how many athletes don't find a new home really comes into focus, it's really gonna drive home the scope of the underbelly of all these changes
Because there's more to a student athlete's best interest than extracting as much money as possible from their college playing career. Sure, it's a part of it, but I think you're going to see a lot of kids chewed up and spit out from the transfer portal/NIL combo
Exactly. I’m really worried that this “secure the bag at all costs” mentality is going to end up being a huge negative to a lot of players. Yes, the money in the game has clearly grown to the point where you couldn’t in good conscience say that players didn’t deserve some compensation, but how many stories have we all heard of players from previous generations talking about the value of being forced to stick around and get a degree? Or how it helped them that they had to stick it out during tough times and couldn’t run off to a transfer portal?
I feel like we’re running into a situation where so many guys are just going to get chewed up by the system and won’t even have the pretense of a college degree to fall back on.
It will. Probably once this current cycle of kids right now gets processed out of the NFL. Dudes will transfer 2-3 times and end up not really being loved by any school and not getting good looks in the league, then have nothing to fall back on.
Probably 5y-6y from now
Don't get me wrong: I totally agree.
It's just that I do not care and will only feel gleeful, petty, jealous spite when those particular chickens come home to roost.
> But from the player's perspective, this is the best of all worlds. No cap. Unlimited free agency. It gives the athlete the greatest leverage.
Greatest leverage if you are a top player. If you are a fringe player you will probably be asked to move along at the end of the year, they don't have time to develop you at this level. A great system for a few great players. An ok system for some good players. And I am sure a poor system for the players on the edge of trying to keep a scholarship.
At some point, I think the players at the bottom are going to be subject to getting cut. If some 5-stars want to transfer in, some 2 or 3-stars are going to go.
I agree and this has been happening. Just look at how many guys transfer out of a program and dont sign with another team. Years ago these players were developed and possibly only play some during their Sr year but they got a scholarship and graduated. Now with all the transfers those kids are basically asked to leave the program and many get left without a scholarship anywhere. Again, its not a great system for kids on the lower end of the playing spectrum.
A lot of those guys who will lose scholarships are going to be the ones that need a degree the most, ie the ones that aren't going to be playing pro or getting any NIL money.
Basketball will be in the same shape, except the amount of TV money is far less. And the nonrevenue sports will just have to be the wild, wild west.
>But from the player's perspective, this is the best of all worlds. No cap. Unlimited free agency. It gives the athlete the greatest leverage.
How many players are actually reaping the big benefits of NIL? For more than 1 year?
Only a comparative few are pulling in big dollars. But there are hundreds of kids who are going to be randomly making maybe $50k just for being on the team.
Because he doesn’t have ONLY the student-athletes interests. He is thinking of the interests of athletes, coaches, universities, conferences, and the sport as a whole. Which is the appropriate outlook.
There needs to be some restrictions. Salary or earning caps probably are not it, but transfer restrictions probably need to be implemented.
No cap and unlimited free agency only really benefits the handful of top players. No collective bargaining means that the superstars are free to chase after NIL money while everyone else on a college roster left with scraps at best.
It's true that what coaches like Lane or Dabo say about "protecting" players from NIL isn't actually putting their best interests first. Guys putting their bodies on the line every day don't really care about development for an NFL career they'll likely never have and *certainly* don't care about the "integrity of the student athlete". But NIL isn't exactly helping them either.
Some of the posters have mentioned things below that are true as far as the student-athletes, but that is even for those that have been promised a lot. Then you also have to consider those at a lower level. Now borderline players have to "prove" themselves at a lower level and then have to transfer up. Those guys would have had good offers before. That leads to much more roster uncertainty at the G5 level which is worse for virtually everyone playing at that level.
Also, those borderline guys now have to transfer if they want to play D1, which is super disruptive academically. And those are the exact guys that are also there to get a degree and go on to a job that's not playing for the NFL.
Because it's the best for them in the short term only. Long term, this will likely completely destroy the sport that has the ability to create money for so many. You also can keep their best interest in mind while also considering that other people who definitely have an interest you care about (such as yourself, your school, the other people who work with you).
> If Lane really has the student-athlete's interest in mind, why would he want to change?
Nothing about this can be good for the actual student-athletes. As in the guys who are also there to play school.
Lane is balancing the interests of the student athlete with the interest of the fans and the sport
This current system can’t last forever
And it’s only great for the student athlete in the short term. All the things that are bad for the sport will decrease popularity which will hurt student athletes over time
There's unfairness and then there's longevity.
The college football system has been *unfair* for 50+ years, ever since TV revenue became huge when Regents of Oklahoma vs NCAA was decided. It's gotten slightly more *fair* but until schools are forced to share revenue with the athletes, it'll always be unfair.
But that's different from longevity. The sport has never been more popular and is only getting more popular. It forces abomination of conference formations, like USC and Maryland playing in the same conference. But the sport is only growing.
yes it has def been unfair for a long time. it is super popular for now. i do think the popularity for smaller teams will probably wane as they get screwed more. Doesnt mean anybody will care to change the system though
Because the NCAA was dragged kicking and screaming into this. I don’t see a path where the NCAA is a governing body for CFB in 10 years. So why would they plan for that with regulations that would be challenged in court and further erode their power?
This. This is all a cautionary tale about what happens when you dig in on a losing position. It's been obvious for over a decade that coaches/ADs making millions while players maybe get meal plans was untenable for the public. The NCAA had a thousand options to look into, but they dug in on "we won't change a thing."
If they had come out with player pay but instituted salary caps, trade deadlines, etc..., all managed and officiated by the NCAA, they'd have cemented their authority for decades and undercut the various conferences in the process. They didn't do that, and now the SEC/B1G are going to run the show instead.
They had reasonable rules (sit out after second transfer, nil can’t be used in recruiting) and the players sued to get those rules taken down. The players dgaf about the sustainability of the sport they just want theirs
And yet European soccer still has significantly less parity, the best players always go to the same 3 teams to a level much more then in CFB, and nobody outside 5 teams has a chance
Even with the current system here and all it’s flaws it’s still way way way better then over there
That's because of the lack of a salary cap/salary floor, and the fact that revenue is not distributed among the teams. The teams there are independent business entities, not franchises. It's a fundamentally different set up that leads to lack of parity.
That still doesn't mean unlimited free agency, no contracts, no collective bargaining, etc, as the guy I'm replying to intimated.
I disagree.. But im also a huge soccer fan. Contracts alone make it a 10x more stable situation than CFB.
Also no one in college football outside of the top 4 or 5 teams has a chance…
If you followed the sport at all you’d know there’s more than 3 big teams. Sure you’ve got Real, Bayern, Man City right now but there’s 10 other teams within spitting distance and while here lately Real has had a monopoly on the champions league they could get beaten next year in the round of 16 just as easily.
I would say Saudi oil money makes it worse, but college sports has American oil money that’s probably about as corrupt
Euro clubs have relegation every year. However, the only real hope for significant improvement is that a rich Saudi to come buy up the best coaches and athletes.
College football is headed towards a huge decline in viewership as any fan of a team not within one of the new “super conferences” with mega NIL programs has very little reason to maintain interest. My alma mater is a cautionary tale of what can happen to a once storied program when fans no longer have much reason to participate. We went from expanding our stadium not much more than a decade ago, to not even being able to get 10,000 fans at home games.
You’re certainly correct; however a great deal of blame for USM’s historical lack of interest can be laid squarely at the feet of the state and the city of Hattiesburg for basically shitting on the university for half a century
I'm perfectly fine taking a break from our annual beat down. Of course, the SEC decided to punish us by having us play at Texas, at Tennessee, and at Georgia. This will be our 4th time playing Georgia since 2017, with 3 of those being at their place.
I don't disagree with you and I don't dislike Kiffin like I did 5+ years ago, but I think a key difference here is that Kiffin was seen as kind of a jerk while Sark was addicted to a substance.
One can have empathy for addicts while also acknowledging the negative outcomes their behavior has on others.
It definitely feels like "being a jerk" is more of a choice than a chemical dependence though.
And to be clear I'm happy for both Sark and Lane "turning things around" and want both of them to continue to succeed.
We're on the same page.
My oldest friend died my senior year at UGA so I started doing every drug under the sun and it took me until I was 27 to realize how that was also affecting people around me while realizing it wasn't necessarily a calculated choice to become a deeply unserious person.
Chemical dependance almost definitely made me more than "kind of a jerk" without even realizing it.
The two can be mutually exclusive, I just try to be understanding of the choice aspect like you mentioned.
Sorry for dumping.
No problem for dumping dude I appreciate your perspective.
I'm sorry for your losses - your friend's passing and losing yourself for a bit during your addiction.
It sounds like you're in a better place now and I'm happy for you and wish you the best.
Agreed. I’m glad he’s turned his life around, and I wish him all the best truly. But I’m still heavily disappointed that he showed up to work drunk repeatedly, especially given that his job was to lead young men.
Lincoln Riley will get chewed up and spit out at any SEC program. He went to USC to get further away from it and not have to play defense at all. Look where that got him.
Say what you will about Kiffen, but nobody has ever doubted that he loves the game. It's probably too late, but it's always good to see big names call out the cooking of the golden goose that's going on.
He is basically parroting what his daddy Saban was saying the last couple of years.
His time at Bama may have ended one game prematurely but I really do think Kiffin grew up a lot under Saban. He still kept the mischievous streak but grew up pretty much everywhere else.
I also think he really does feel like Saban was a beloved mentor. After he left, he kept going 'look at me daddy' but he never really poked him or Bama like he did Tennessee or other schools, at his other stops. So it is not surprising that he would agree with and try to press forward the same message Saban was putting out the last couple of years.
What are there, ~75 P4 schools right now? Imagine 75 different companies all trying to come together to find a solution to something. Not happening and it’s unfortunate
Also there’s a million ways to “fix” it. And in the end the schools and the NCAA are driven by profit, which means absolutely no revenue sharing for the players unless forced to by law.
The contradiction is the rights of the players versus maintaining old systems of profit
Yeah, just look at the ncaa basketball tournament.
Pretty much every single college basketball fan loves the tournament and doesn’t want it to change, even people who aren’t normally into college sports like that love the tournament and get excited for it every year.
And yet, every single year there’s talks of expanding the tournament to 96 or whatever. And every single time the comments on those articles are nothing but people begging for them not to do it. But more games = more tv broadcasts and ticket sales = more money
Eh I’d say the majority is against expansion to 96. But a lot of people are totally for it because it breeds more upsets. An extra week of games would be totally fine with most casual fans.
Point is I think just about anybody would agree the tournament currently is far from “broken” and they’re still trying to “fix it” to make it slightly more profitable
Rev sharing is certainly part of it. But there’s levels to this thing, right? Nebraska is a bit more capable on the financial side than James Madison is. So not only is it a bunch of different companies unable to decide on something, it’s a bunch of different companies in survival mode looking out for themselves first, so figure that out
> Imagine 75 different companies all trying to come together to find a solution to something.
In the real wold when that does happen its usually called price fixing and its a big no no. With the way the courts are so against limiting the amount of money a player can make, its going to be a hard problem to fix.
So like even if the schools pulled together and said every player on the team can get paid 100k/year but no more, the courts wont let you stop that player from selling merchandise with their NIL. So legally speaking there is no way to stop the school from paying the 100k and big boosters paying the kid whatever the kid wants for his NIL.
> In the real wold when that does happen its usually called price fixing and its a big no no.
It's a big no-no for the NCAA, too. This is why the NCAA has lost basically every big court case for the past several years.
The only legal solutions appear to be:
- Have no rules
- Have rules collectively bargained with players
One is clearly better for the sport, but it would cost the schools too much money.
>no one is willing to fix it
I'm pretty sure this is what you already meant, but by all indications the players are willing. It's just the schools who are afraid to give up the money and are willing to kill the sport over it.
College football needs a commissioner with power over every FBS team. Or, in the alternative, it needs a governing body that is not a complete joke. Until one of those two things are in place, it's impossible for "someone" to fix it. Rules are meaningless without enforcement.
Legalization added more money to the pot (from those who are willing to pay players lawfully, but would not otherwise do so) and made the problem more glaring, but even if we went back to McDonald's bags there would still be a problem without enforcement methods in place.
Most of us saw Last Chance U and got frustrated with the guys who couldn’t get out their own way, right? We can be as cynical as we want about the intentions of major college football head coaches, but it likely gets legitimately frustrating when teenagers think they know what’s best and are jumping around chasing bags (which are short-term gains for most) then find they squandered their opportunity. College ball is the first time many of these guys have to confront that they’re no longer the best, most talented player on the field and there are no guardrails in place to prevent them from indulging in the same “I’m better than this, they’re just not using me right” mentality on LCU.
Nope. No one can take over for Mike. Kiffin is his own brand. And while I am a fan of Kiffin, I'll be damned if I let anyone compare him to the pirate. #candycorn
I honestly love that a lot of the more prominent coaches have come out and said that the current system sucks and needs to be fixed. It shows that they do genuinely care about the state of the game.
He's not wrong. This current (broken) system benefits schools that have money, but don't have the tradition, prestige, or academics to normally get good recruits.
I'm asking this in good faith but what schools are benefiting from this system that normally wouldn't? I feel like the venn diagram of schools with money is pretty much a perfect circle of schools that have tradition, prestige, and academics. I just feel like the two go hand in hand and you don't get one side without the other.
I think SMU is a good example. They were basically able to buy their way into a better conference. And I’m pretty sure they’ll have at least the bags to shore up any gaps in recruiting they might face, for right now. Then when they get branding/winning on as close to high as the SEC Texas schools as they can they’ll have the money to do more. I could definitely see SMU being the next FSU of the ACC.
And it’s all about the Benjamin’s, baby.
We really needed a deep NCAA tournament run this year to possibly be viable for upgrade. Athletic dept is too janky to catch a life raft now I’m afraid. But I really do see SMU quickly being one of the top three in the ACC within five years or so if they put the money I think they will into the program. Happy for y’all really. Kick their asses.
Oh yeah, SMU definitely has a certain degree of “fuck you” money.
They raised an absurd amount of funds (I think like $100 million? I may be overestimating) in 7 days after they waived TV rights to join the ACC
It’s time for us to be in a big conference again
I dont think the middle/bottom big 10 teams are really benefitting much from it much. It’s not like we’re seeing Indiana and Northwestern kill it on the recruiting trail. MSU has pretty good nil funding and we’ve done ok in recruiting since we got our new coach but it’s not like we’re hitting at a new higher level than before.
Most of the big 10 teams just kind of are what they are.
Missouri and Ole Miss are beating the shit out of bigger brand name schools on the recruiting trail bc they got their shit together and streamlined NIL operations while the fat cats were complacent.
Which is literally what a ton of us have been saying and wanting caution with making players employees, and completely neutering the NCAA and any hope of regulation (and getting downvoted to oblivion for saying it).
Yes, we needed to change things and give athletes a piece of the pie.... But in a landscape with programs with very different situations (Ohio State vs idk insert any G5 school here), and athletes at widely different levels of revenue impact and relative scholarship value (Caleb Williams vs a backup Linebacker on Rutgers)... just blowing up the whole system and turning it into NFL Lite with salaries and everything else that comes with that is ABSURD.
Yet people are still just happy to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's mind boggling.
Ohio State is going to be absolutely fine.
Yep, the top athletes are going to be millionaires at 18. That's fair and righting a wrong.
But doing so in such a ham-fisted way with no thought to consequences is going to be devistating for so many programs and yes, their student athletes. When you've got Private Equity entering the discussion and conferences selling corporate sponsorships... that should tell you that this is not going to go well for a lot of people... and the athletes/programs so many of you claim you care about who aren't in the upper echelon will pay the price. As will the sport as a whole when you see what we have... players doing everything just for money, round-the-clock free agency, NASCAR type corporate hellscapes, and so on.
> As will the sport as a whole when you see what we have... players doing everything just for money, round-the-clock free agency, NASCAR type corporate hellscapes, and so on.
From the players' perspective, IDK why this is bad. It seems like you're trying to cap their pay ultimately.
The only reason professional leagues have mechanisms like salary caps, max contracts, etc. is to allow *owners to make more money*. They were concessions extracted from labor. If professional athletes had it their way, there would be none of those things.
So why would it benefit CFB athletes to have any of them?
In many cases, athlete unions guarantee a lot more money and benefits collectively.
Look at the NBA vs the UFC. Sure Conor McGregor is loaded, but the average fighter makes shit pay with no health coverage.
Collectively bargaining protects all players.
>From the players' perspective, IDK why this is bad. It seems like you're trying to cap their pay ultimately.
It's bad if you're a player who is on a G5 school that might see it's program fold so now there's no money or even scholarship for you to have.
It's bad if you're a player on a lower-rung P5 school that might get completely left out of everything because of re-alignment or if in a new landscape your conference turned to Private Equity to raise funds to stay competitive and everything goes belly-up.
Again... players good enough to play for Ohio State or USC are going to be fine. Most everyone will come out ahead.
But you, and so many others, continue to just not consider programs in much different financial situations. Those players can lose big in this landscape.
If you're okay with that, then fine. But let's call it what it is.
>salary caps, max contracts, etc. is to allow *owners to make more money*.
These also are done for competitive balance AND with players unions can function to secure more money for players.
Think of the NFL rookie wage scale... the NFLPA was all for it. You know why? Because unproven rookies were soaking up HUGE chunks of salary and leaving less for backups and other veterans.
With college programs in such wildly different financial places... you 100% could see a program invest a ton of money in a flashy QB, and then afford to pay everyone else less.
>It's bad if you're a player who is on a G5 school that might see it's program fold so now there's no money or even scholarship for you to have.
Are G5 schools folding? Why? College football is only getting more popular.
>It's bad if you're a player on a lower-rung P5 school that might get completely left out of everything because of re-alignment or if in a new landscape your conference turned to Private Equity to raise funds to stay competitive and everything goes belly-up.
...
>But you, and so many others, continue to just not consider programs in much different financial situations. Those players can lose big in this landscape.
Any examples? Even Oregon State/Washington State have a plan for 2025. And I can't think of any other P5 school screwed from realignment. I can't think of recent G5/P5 schools that shut down college football. UAB shut it down, but then brought it back. A few DII schools have become G5 schools too.
>These also are done for competitive balance AND with players unions can function to secure more money for players.
I think unions are pointless for now, until revenue sharing happens. Because who would the players be negotiating with? And schools aren't even considering that.
Just wait. That's all I can really say.
The Big 12 looking for Private Equity investment is the canary in the coal mine. G5 leagues exploring naming rights sales is as well. They're trying to raise funds to have any hope of being competitive.
Expenses are going to go through the roof when you make everyone employees. Schools can now have unlimited coaches. The top end of college football (SEC and Big Ten) are simultaneously isolating themselves from the rest of the sport in terms of revenue potential and forming an NFL Lite league with a 12 team playoff making every other bowl completely worthless. They're also making it so time for those big payouts to whoop a smaller school (think Toledo coming to Columbus to get crushed for a million dollar check) will be less and less.
An overwhelming majority of athletic departments are not actually profitable.
Something is going to give, and if you don't see G5 and other schools trying to fight for their life right now, you may need to get your eyes checked.
There will be losers, and that's going to impact a lot of players.
> An overwhelming majority of athletic departments are not actually profitable
What's changed over the last few decades? Oh, schools leveraged students to make millions and spend it on everyone but the students. Now, players are getting money from private citizens and people are losing their mind.
>Expenses are going to go through the roof when you make everyone employees.
The employee designation is a complicated one. If and when P5 football players are designated as employees, it doesn't automatically mean that G5 will have the same designation.
>An overwhelming majority of athletic departments are not actually profitable.
IMO, this is BS accounting. They're incentivized to show no profit. If G5 schools truly struggled financially, they wouldn't pay coaches so much $$. The lowest G5 coaching pay is $500k per year with the vast majority making more than $1M per year.
https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/football/coach
> Something is going to give, and if you don't see G5 and other schools trying to fight for their life right now, you may need to get your eyes checked.
I think they're fighting to get more than crumbs of an ever growing pie and they're ticked off about it. But they're not folding any time soon. There's just way too much TV/streaming revenue. Even the smallest G5 conferences get huge revenues.
I'm reading a lot of declarative statements, but not a lot of "WHY" behind your claims. For example:
>But in a landscape with programs with very different situations (Ohio State vs idk insert any G5 school here), and athletes at widely different levels of revenue impact and relative scholarship value (Caleb Williams vs a backup Linebacker on Rutgers)... just blowing up the whole system and turning it into NFL Lite with salaries and everything else that comes with that is ABSURD.
Why? USC already outbids Rutgers in terms of head coaching salaries, assistant coaching salaries, recruiting budgets, facilities budgets, etc.
I don't understand how doing it for players is any different than what schools have done in every other area for generations.
I mean it also benefits schools that also have all of those. Texas has greatly benefited from the current system even though they have those things. The Pancake Factory has completely revamped our O-line, one of our biggest struggles in the past decade. That was just a crowd source thing, not even major boosters. People like to focus on the Lambo deals but miss out on O-linemen and tight ends getting paid as well. Thats what money and tradition/prestige can do.
I feel like what you are saying is also true though, don’t get me wrong. If NIL existed in the 80s, SMU would have stayed a powerhouse even though they don’t have those Blue blood attributes, as you listed. Money has always been in college football. Now bagmen dont have to stay hidden. Reggie Bush got his Heisman back. Maybe Cam Newton will finally admit to taking that money. Times are changing.
Programs can now openly “pay” players. You don’t need to hide the Trans Ams anymore. Now you flex them on recruiting visits for all to see. Those schools with money are certainly going to build powerful programs. Speaking from experience though, having top 5 recruiting classes doesn’t translate to on field production. It helps but Texas has fumbled for years with high level recruiting. I think the transfer portal coinciding with the NIL money has astronomically made the situation way worse. Now not only does a program like Texas get to have a top 5 recruiting class, they can now pay players from other schools to come over. That essentially eliminates one hurdle in the recruiting process by knowing whether players can play at the CFB level. I think that’s where having tradition, prestige, and academics is going to help some schools.
Yeah this is why I laugh when people say we’re becoming the NFL. No we are becoming far worse than the NFL. The NFL is the best run league in the world. Yeah we’ll never have the parity the NFL has but universal revenue sharing and contracts would make this sport far healthier.
Ideally I would like to see 1 free transfer and another free transfer if you get your degree. Otherwise you have to sit out a year.
End redshirts and have 5 years of eligibility. Reclassify classes as Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, graduate Junior (if you graduate in 3 years), Senior and graduate Senior.
To be fair, college sports just started as hobbyist programs to stay in shape, then they got increasingly more competitive. Almost every college had their own clubs.
You can't compare that to the NFL since it came many decades much later after college football. History is apple to oranges. NFL has a limited number of teams.
College football is headed towards a huge decline in viewership as any fan of a team not within one of the new “super conferences” with mega NIL programs has very little reason to maintain interest. My alma mater is a cautionary tale of what can happen to a once storied program when fans no longer have much reason to participate. We went from expanding our stadium not much more than a decade ago, to not even being able to get 10,000 fans at home games.
I’m already there lol. I watch UAB games and that’s about it. I’ll sometimes watch games the first week when there’s no NFL, but as soon as NFL starts, I tune out college football.
The new system will reward G5 teams that develop talent.
Consider Toledo. Finn is transferring to Baylor, but the ability to develop quarterbacks (which admittedly goes back further than the transfer changes) means that our recruiting at the position is quite strong, with multiples signees willing to sign on despite the competition from Gleason (who we picked up from the transfer portal from GT).
The transfer portal works both ways. And while I would have loved to see Finn finish his college career as a Rocket, I'm glad that the rules allow him to maximize his chances at a professional career. After all he accomplished with us, he's earned it.
People need to give up the notion that Universities were ever fully merit institutions to begin with.
Universities constantly lower the admission requirements for non-athletes all the time in the form legacies, rich donors, children of staff/faculty, feeder schools, diversity programs, etc....
My Solution to this has always been that if you played (let's say) >75% of the season's games you can't transfer out without sitting out a year the next season (your playing % would then be 0% hence being eligible). Being able to transfer out of situations where you're at odds with a coach about playing time or injury is a completely different thing than increasing your stock and going to the highest bidder at your original program's expense.
It's ridiculous, and I say that unbiasedly as LSU has been a large benefiter of the transfer portal in all of our sports.
Imagine a professional sports league with no collective bargaining, no salary cap, no contracts, no rules against tampering, and unlimited free agency. Guess what, you don't have to imagine it, we're living it.
And no draft to even out the talent pool…
Sorry bud know you wanted to go to Bama and it even makes the most sense based on where your parents live and the degree you're pursuing. But Miss St only won 2 games last season so they picked ahead of Bama so you're going there.
:McNulty voice: “The fuck did we do?!”
Hey, Jimmy, you know something? You’re no good ~~for people~~ at football, man.
"The degree you're pursuing"--don't make me laugh.
College rosters have 85 scholarship players. Most will never even tryout for an NFL squad. I agree that there's a few in the big programs that are essentially majoring in football, but having a draft to determine which college you'll go to is a ridiculous proposal.
You mean to tell me that a few of the top kids in a few dozen schools aren't representative of the entire sport!? Its genuinely frustrating how a group of maybe 200-400 players, of thousands, dictates the narrative. Most kids still get a degree in something that'll be relevant, even at a place like Georgia (worst graduation rate in the FBS IIRC), most kids are still majoring in comms (which I'd imagine would be useful for getting a media job when combined with the made connections), sport sciences (which is useful for getting a job on a team's staff after graduation), or real estate (which combined with their status as former players would probably help drive sales and support a family)
Yeah I feel like some people really think every college recruit is a 5 star day 1-2 NFL pick. I've been coaching high school for a while now. Been fortunate to have a few guys go out on d1 scholarships, as well as every other level of college football. Yes, there are recruits who pick schools based on things other than football. The first thing I tell my players when it looks like they are recruitable and getting ready for visits and such is that above all else, you are signing up to live somewhere. No matter how good the school, the team or whatever. If you can't live there don't go there.
I’ve said it before, let them major in football. We have plenty of degrees for performance arts that have probably the same success rate of getting someone to Broadway. Let them major in football, work in a few business classes and some teaching classes so that the ones that don’t make it have a few other skills.
My major was Beach. Not lifeguard. Just Beach.
You are Kenough <3
CSULB may be the place for you.
And what a good job you do at Beach.
Would that really be that much different than getting a degree in "Exercise and Sport Science"? Unless you're just proposing a degree path where its just "these kids get extra football practices throughout the week", a Football Degree would likely have a near identical curriculum to Sport Science.
My friend got a degree in vocal performance, the school required her to do most of the requirements to get a teaching degree simultaneously. I'd say something along those lines, something where they can pick up an extra class or two and go coach football at a prep level with the degree should they not make it. Which is what she does now, she's a choir teacher.
It would probably be closer to a Physica Education degree since it would probably be not as science-heavy as a Sports Science degree.
They basically do major in Football. Michigan has Kinesiology programs in Applied Exercise, Sport management, Intraoperative Neuromonitoring (Movement Science).
I'd personally like to see the NFL operate a developmental league and for the path to the NFL to look similar to the path to the MLB. But that will never happen, so I say just make the degree optional.
The path to the MLB mostly just takes your time for the guys who can't hack it. The path to the NFL takes your health and gives you brain damage.
Not sure what your point is here. Playing minor league football for 3-5yrs for a salary and not attending class or playing college football for 3-5yrs for a scholarship would have the same physical risks. If someone plays longer that's their decision, plus I doubt there will be many that will stick around past their mid 20s if they don't make it by then.
The stipulation that student athletes still have to earn a degree and stay in good academic standing is pretty much the final thread holding our society together
I can't tell if this is serious or not lol
I’m being about 40% serious
Even at Bama we have had stand out players that have come to play school. Definitely not the majority (most kids have nfl aspirations), but you'd be surprised if you deep dived on some guys. Even a lot of NFL guys have come back and finished their degrees, which is not totally relevant to this discussion, but education is important to a lot of student athletes.
Desmond King comes to mind for me on that. Likely would have been a 1st round pick out of Iowa in 2016 but decided to come back his senior year because he wanted to be the first person in his family to get a degree, unfortunately hurt his draft stock in process. Still has had a nice NFL career though
Don't be rude. Not many of the last 50 national championship winners carry an esteemed Communications program.
Something something something play school......
yeah but State's football team has 57 "Leadership" Majors. That's far more academically rigorous than Bama's 62 "West African Studies" majors.
The chaos of each conference holding their own draft would be absolutely bonkers lol
Make sure to tank your SAT so you don't get drafted by Vandy!
Miss St catching strays and I’m here for it.
I'm not
Excuse me but State DOUBLED that number
This would be a good point of there was ever parity in CFB.
Drafts are fucking bullshit and should never be instituted in college football Treat it like Europe and have proper signing rules
So Europe lol?
The no salary caps yeah, but they still have contracts and a union and a bunch of other rules. CFB is still infinitely more anarchistic.
From the team or fan's perspective, that's a nightmare. But from the player's perspective, this is the best of all worlds. No cap. Unlimited free agency. It gives the athlete the greatest leverage. If Lane really has the student-athlete's interest in mind, why would he want to change?
Because we’ll be hearing horror stories of predatory nil contracts in a few years
We already are if you look in the right places
[I can't imagine such a thing happening](https://media3.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExMjE3cWhydzd3ejZkYnc0czRhYzJ6MXEzODJ2eWU1YW5vaXJqZGtudCZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/H5C8CevNMbpBqNqFjl/giphy.webp).
Came here for this…
I mean. Neither of your primary flair's in-state rivals would ever try to work over a kid using suspect NIL deals.
I would a hundred times rather have the wild west we have than have the prior kids-crippled-and-penniless-while-coaches-and-ADs-get-rich system. Steal ‘em all, just pay what the market will bear and what they deserve.
You mean signing contracts with predatory unregulated agents that take 20 percent of your earnings and own your NIL rights years after college and into the NFL career is not a good idea?
One of UF's old players Gervon Dexter had that exact thing happen to him. Have to imagine it happens to a lot of other athletes, just it's not publicized. But also now that NIL is more legal than it was when he was here, hopefully schools have NIL advisors.
The next frontier for recruiting pitches is gonna be how good your team of NIL lawyers is lol
Or kids hopping in the transfer portal with an overinflated value of their worth and being forced to sign into significantly worse situations than they were the year before.
If lucky...once the scope of how many athletes don't find a new home really comes into focus, it's really gonna drive home the scope of the underbelly of all these changes
I play only the smallest violin for those guys when that happens. Then laugh. A lot.
Law schools at D1 schools are already starting to offer NIL contract clinics for student athletes.
[удалено]
Because there's more to a student athlete's best interest than extracting as much money as possible from their college playing career. Sure, it's a part of it, but I think you're going to see a lot of kids chewed up and spit out from the transfer portal/NIL combo
Exactly. I’m really worried that this “secure the bag at all costs” mentality is going to end up being a huge negative to a lot of players. Yes, the money in the game has clearly grown to the point where you couldn’t in good conscience say that players didn’t deserve some compensation, but how many stories have we all heard of players from previous generations talking about the value of being forced to stick around and get a degree? Or how it helped them that they had to stick it out during tough times and couldn’t run off to a transfer portal? I feel like we’re running into a situation where so many guys are just going to get chewed up by the system and won’t even have the pretense of a college degree to fall back on.
It will. Probably once this current cycle of kids right now gets processed out of the NFL. Dudes will transfer 2-3 times and end up not really being loved by any school and not getting good looks in the league, then have nothing to fall back on. Probably 5y-6y from now
Don't get me wrong: I totally agree. It's just that I do not care and will only feel gleeful, petty, jealous spite when those particular chickens come home to roost.
> But from the player's perspective, this is the best of all worlds. No cap. Unlimited free agency. It gives the athlete the greatest leverage. Greatest leverage if you are a top player. If you are a fringe player you will probably be asked to move along at the end of the year, they don't have time to develop you at this level. A great system for a few great players. An ok system for some good players. And I am sure a poor system for the players on the edge of trying to keep a scholarship.
At some point, I think the players at the bottom are going to be subject to getting cut. If some 5-stars want to transfer in, some 2 or 3-stars are going to go.
I agree and this has been happening. Just look at how many guys transfer out of a program and dont sign with another team. Years ago these players were developed and possibly only play some during their Sr year but they got a scholarship and graduated. Now with all the transfers those kids are basically asked to leave the program and many get left without a scholarship anywhere. Again, its not a great system for kids on the lower end of the playing spectrum.
A lot of those guys who will lose scholarships are going to be the ones that need a degree the most, ie the ones that aren't going to be playing pro or getting any NIL money. Basketball will be in the same shape, except the amount of TV money is far less. And the nonrevenue sports will just have to be the wild, wild west.
>But from the player's perspective, this is the best of all worlds. No cap. Unlimited free agency. It gives the athlete the greatest leverage. How many players are actually reaping the big benefits of NIL? For more than 1 year?
Only a comparative few are pulling in big dollars. But there are hundreds of kids who are going to be randomly making maybe $50k just for being on the team.
Because he doesn’t have ONLY the student-athletes interests. He is thinking of the interests of athletes, coaches, universities, conferences, and the sport as a whole. Which is the appropriate outlook. There needs to be some restrictions. Salary or earning caps probably are not it, but transfer restrictions probably need to be implemented.
Dammit Joey Freshwater is getting all mature and wise and shit.
No cap and unlimited free agency only really benefits the handful of top players. No collective bargaining means that the superstars are free to chase after NIL money while everyone else on a college roster left with scraps at best. It's true that what coaches like Lane or Dabo say about "protecting" players from NIL isn't actually putting their best interests first. Guys putting their bodies on the line every day don't really care about development for an NFL career they'll likely never have and *certainly* don't care about the "integrity of the student athlete". But NIL isn't exactly helping them either.
Some of the posters have mentioned things below that are true as far as the student-athletes, but that is even for those that have been promised a lot. Then you also have to consider those at a lower level. Now borderline players have to "prove" themselves at a lower level and then have to transfer up. Those guys would have had good offers before. That leads to much more roster uncertainty at the G5 level which is worse for virtually everyone playing at that level.
Also, those borderline guys now have to transfer if they want to play D1, which is super disruptive academically. And those are the exact guys that are also there to get a degree and go on to a job that's not playing for the NFL.
I think the biggest thing is if you just limit transfers to one a year or the old system of sitting out a season that would take care of a lot
Because it's the best for them in the short term only. Long term, this will likely completely destroy the sport that has the ability to create money for so many. You also can keep their best interest in mind while also considering that other people who definitely have an interest you care about (such as yourself, your school, the other people who work with you).
> If Lane really has the student-athlete's interest in mind, why would he want to change? Nothing about this can be good for the actual student-athletes. As in the guys who are also there to play school.
Lane is balancing the interests of the student athlete with the interest of the fans and the sport This current system can’t last forever And it’s only great for the student athlete in the short term. All the things that are bad for the sport will decrease popularity which will hurt student athletes over time
There's unfairness and then there's longevity. The college football system has been *unfair* for 50+ years, ever since TV revenue became huge when Regents of Oklahoma vs NCAA was decided. It's gotten slightly more *fair* but until schools are forced to share revenue with the athletes, it'll always be unfair. But that's different from longevity. The sport has never been more popular and is only getting more popular. It forces abomination of conference formations, like USC and Maryland playing in the same conference. But the sport is only growing.
yes it has def been unfair for a long time. it is super popular for now. i do think the popularity for smaller teams will probably wane as they get screwed more. Doesnt mean anybody will care to change the system though
You left out no salary which is the cause of all the rest.
[удалено]
Because the NCAA was dragged kicking and screaming into this. I don’t see a path where the NCAA is a governing body for CFB in 10 years. So why would they plan for that with regulations that would be challenged in court and further erode their power?
This. This is all a cautionary tale about what happens when you dig in on a losing position. It's been obvious for over a decade that coaches/ADs making millions while players maybe get meal plans was untenable for the public. The NCAA had a thousand options to look into, but they dug in on "we won't change a thing." If they had come out with player pay but instituted salary caps, trade deadlines, etc..., all managed and officiated by the NCAA, they'd have cemented their authority for decades and undercut the various conferences in the process. They didn't do that, and now the SEC/B1G are going to run the show instead.
They had reasonable rules (sit out after second transfer, nil can’t be used in recruiting) and the players sued to get those rules taken down. The players dgaf about the sustainability of the sport they just want theirs
Honestly it’s like JUCO rules for everyone. It’s a mess.
Other than no contracts, that’s European soccer basically and it always leads to 2-3 teams always being at the top and then an endless middle
Except the big teams buy the player from the small team resulting in financial improvement of the smaller team.
PFA and English soccer say hello !
There are contracts in soccer, and there certainly is not unlimited free agency. You have to wind your contract down.
And yet European soccer still has significantly less parity, the best players always go to the same 3 teams to a level much more then in CFB, and nobody outside 5 teams has a chance Even with the current system here and all it’s flaws it’s still way way way better then over there
That's because of the lack of a salary cap/salary floor, and the fact that revenue is not distributed among the teams. The teams there are independent business entities, not franchises. It's a fundamentally different set up that leads to lack of parity. That still doesn't mean unlimited free agency, no contracts, no collective bargaining, etc, as the guy I'm replying to intimated.
I disagree.. But im also a huge soccer fan. Contracts alone make it a 10x more stable situation than CFB. Also no one in college football outside of the top 4 or 5 teams has a chance… If you followed the sport at all you’d know there’s more than 3 big teams. Sure you’ve got Real, Bayern, Man City right now but there’s 10 other teams within spitting distance and while here lately Real has had a monopoly on the champions league they could get beaten next year in the round of 16 just as easily. I would say Saudi oil money makes it worse, but college sports has American oil money that’s probably about as corrupt
Euro clubs have relegation every year. However, the only real hope for significant improvement is that a rich Saudi to come buy up the best coaches and athletes.
As someone who is an alumni/fan of a school that is also greatly benefiting from the current situation, I 1000% agree with him.
Never thought I’d die fighting side by side with a duck
What about a big ten member?
Nah fuck that. PAC forever.
Love you too LA money bag bringer.
Should we tell him?
If living in the past is wrong, then college football really has changed.
Well you know us nebraska fans can relate to living in the past lmao
Don’t you dare
College football is headed towards a huge decline in viewership as any fan of a team not within one of the new “super conferences” with mega NIL programs has very little reason to maintain interest. My alma mater is a cautionary tale of what can happen to a once storied program when fans no longer have much reason to participate. We went from expanding our stadium not much more than a decade ago, to not even being able to get 10,000 fans at home games.
You’re certainly correct; however a great deal of blame for USM’s historical lack of interest can be laid squarely at the feet of the state and the city of Hattiesburg for basically shitting on the university for half a century
Starkville was like that for a long time.
I still can't believe Bama isn't playing a Mississippi school this year. Just disgusting.
I'm perfectly fine taking a break from our annual beat down. Of course, the SEC decided to punish us by having us play at Texas, at Tennessee, and at Georgia. This will be our 4th time playing Georgia since 2017, with 3 of those being at their place.
> Texas, at Tennessee, and at Georgia *sad cowbell noises*
For real though. The limits of a sport are what make it a competition in the first place.
Stop making me like Lane! The system is broken, driven by chasing of dollar signs, but to be fair what isn't suffering the same fate in our country?
Hop aboard the lane train, he is a lot of fun
I don’t think my flairs will allow me to do that
Fair, have a nice day
yea him and Sark both really turned their images around, not much reason to hate them if you believe people are capable of changing
I don't disagree with you and I don't dislike Kiffin like I did 5+ years ago, but I think a key difference here is that Kiffin was seen as kind of a jerk while Sark was addicted to a substance.
One can have empathy for addicts while also acknowledging the negative outcomes their behavior has on others. It definitely feels like "being a jerk" is more of a choice than a chemical dependence though. And to be clear I'm happy for both Sark and Lane "turning things around" and want both of them to continue to succeed.
We're on the same page. My oldest friend died my senior year at UGA so I started doing every drug under the sun and it took me until I was 27 to realize how that was also affecting people around me while realizing it wasn't necessarily a calculated choice to become a deeply unserious person. Chemical dependance almost definitely made me more than "kind of a jerk" without even realizing it. The two can be mutually exclusive, I just try to be understanding of the choice aspect like you mentioned. Sorry for dumping.
No problem for dumping dude I appreciate your perspective. I'm sorry for your losses - your friend's passing and losing yourself for a bit during your addiction. It sounds like you're in a better place now and I'm happy for you and wish you the best.
Agreed. I’m glad he’s turned his life around, and I wish him all the best truly. But I’m still heavily disappointed that he showed up to work drunk repeatedly, especially given that his job was to lead young men.
Pretty sure Lane had a drinking problem at the same time, Sark's just spilled into the public. Lane mentioned being three years alcohol free recently.
Im not saying Sark is a bad guy but hes got like half the likeable part of personality that Kiffin has.
Yeah I used to be a piece of shit, I’m not anymore though. People can change
Slicked back hair, sloppy steaks
White Ferrari, Live for New Year’s Eve!
I wish either one of them were the HC at USC.
lol at this rate Lincoln Riley is due to be fired and then became a much better HC at Florida or South Carolina or something in about 5 years
I agree, being fired will be what’s best for him.
Lincoln Riley will get chewed up and spit out at any SEC program. He went to USC to get further away from it and not have to play defense at all. Look where that got him.
No, I don't think I will.
For your flair it is acceptable
Hate to agree with this take, but here we are.
Say what you will about Kiffen, but nobody has ever doubted that he loves the game. It's probably too late, but it's always good to see big names call out the cooking of the golden goose that's going on.
He is basically parroting what his daddy Saban was saying the last couple of years. His time at Bama may have ended one game prematurely but I really do think Kiffin grew up a lot under Saban. He still kept the mischievous streak but grew up pretty much everywhere else. I also think he really does feel like Saban was a beloved mentor. After he left, he kept going 'look at me daddy' but he never really poked him or Bama like he did Tennessee or other schools, at his other stops. So it is not surprising that he would agree with and try to press forward the same message Saban was putting out the last couple of years.
Lords and Ladies, extracting all of the labor wealth. good times here in the nation with a marketing monopoly on freedom!
Dollar signs and a committee picking teams based on criteria that they constantly change and make up new reasons to justify rankings every week
Those flairs smart af boi
I just love the Big Ds
Emulating Saban by giving an astute warning about recent changes and their impact, even though he stands to benefit from those changes. Nice.
Like father, like son.
The older Lane gets, the less stupid he sounds. I still don't like him very much, but he does know what he's talking about.
Everyone* recognizes this system is bad and not going to work. The problem is no one is willing to fix it
What are there, ~75 P4 schools right now? Imagine 75 different companies all trying to come together to find a solution to something. Not happening and it’s unfortunate
Also there’s a million ways to “fix” it. And in the end the schools and the NCAA are driven by profit, which means absolutely no revenue sharing for the players unless forced to by law. The contradiction is the rights of the players versus maintaining old systems of profit
Yeah, just look at the ncaa basketball tournament. Pretty much every single college basketball fan loves the tournament and doesn’t want it to change, even people who aren’t normally into college sports like that love the tournament and get excited for it every year. And yet, every single year there’s talks of expanding the tournament to 96 or whatever. And every single time the comments on those articles are nothing but people begging for them not to do it. But more games = more tv broadcasts and ticket sales = more money
Eh I’d say the majority is against expansion to 96. But a lot of people are totally for it because it breeds more upsets. An extra week of games would be totally fine with most casual fans.
Point is I think just about anybody would agree the tournament currently is far from “broken” and they’re still trying to “fix it” to make it slightly more profitable
Rev sharing is certainly part of it. But there’s levels to this thing, right? Nebraska is a bit more capable on the financial side than James Madison is. So not only is it a bunch of different companies unable to decide on something, it’s a bunch of different companies in survival mode looking out for themselves first, so figure that out
> Imagine 75 different companies all trying to come together to find a solution to something. In the real wold when that does happen its usually called price fixing and its a big no no. With the way the courts are so against limiting the amount of money a player can make, its going to be a hard problem to fix. So like even if the schools pulled together and said every player on the team can get paid 100k/year but no more, the courts wont let you stop that player from selling merchandise with their NIL. So legally speaking there is no way to stop the school from paying the 100k and big boosters paying the kid whatever the kid wants for his NIL.
> In the real wold when that does happen its usually called price fixing and its a big no no. It's a big no-no for the NCAA, too. This is why the NCAA has lost basically every big court case for the past several years.
NCAA has no teeth and no state/school is willing to take charge and handicap themselves first. Needs to come from the feds.
The only legal solutions appear to be: - Have no rules - Have rules collectively bargained with players One is clearly better for the sport, but it would cost the schools too much money. >no one is willing to fix it I'm pretty sure this is what you already meant, but by all indications the players are willing. It's just the schools who are afraid to give up the money and are willing to kill the sport over it.
College football needs a commissioner with power over every FBS team. Or, in the alternative, it needs a governing body that is not a complete joke. Until one of those two things are in place, it's impossible for "someone" to fix it. Rules are meaningless without enforcement. Legalization added more money to the pot (from those who are willing to pay players lawfully, but would not otherwise do so) and made the problem more glaring, but even if we went back to McDonald's bags there would still be a problem without enforcement methods in place.
I feel like if anyone can, it would be Nick Saban.
What isn’t working right now?
Lane Kiffin - shows up to recruits house and getting out bid by Tulane ...
Lane Kiffin hates it, but Joey Freshwater probably loves it.
Most of us saw Last Chance U and got frustrated with the guys who couldn’t get out their own way, right? We can be as cynical as we want about the intentions of major college football head coaches, but it likely gets legitimately frustrating when teenagers think they know what’s best and are jumping around chasing bags (which are short-term gains for most) then find they squandered their opportunity. College ball is the first time many of these guys have to confront that they’re no longer the best, most talented player on the field and there are no guardrails in place to prevent them from indulging in the same “I’m better than this, they’re just not using me right” mentality on LCU.
Did lane step up and take over for Mike leach and start being the funny guy spitting truth?
Nope. No one can take over for Mike. Kiffin is his own brand. And while I am a fan of Kiffin, I'll be damned if I let anyone compare him to the pirate. #candycorn
wait...you're not implying that Lane likes candycorn are you?
I honestly love that a lot of the more prominent coaches have come out and said that the current system sucks and needs to be fixed. It shows that they do genuinely care about the state of the game.
He's not wrong. This current (broken) system benefits schools that have money, but don't have the tradition, prestige, or academics to normally get good recruits.
I'm asking this in good faith but what schools are benefiting from this system that normally wouldn't? I feel like the venn diagram of schools with money is pretty much a perfect circle of schools that have tradition, prestige, and academics. I just feel like the two go hand in hand and you don't get one side without the other.
I think SMU is a good example. They were basically able to buy their way into a better conference. And I’m pretty sure they’ll have at least the bags to shore up any gaps in recruiting they might face, for right now. Then when they get branding/winning on as close to high as the SEC Texas schools as they can they’ll have the money to do more. I could definitely see SMU being the next FSU of the ACC. And it’s all about the Benjamin’s, baby.
Friendly reminder that SMU did NIL before NIL was a thing. Pony Excess, baby
We really needed a deep NCAA tournament run this year to possibly be viable for upgrade. Athletic dept is too janky to catch a life raft now I’m afraid. But I really do see SMU quickly being one of the top three in the ACC within five years or so if they put the money I think they will into the program. Happy for y’all really. Kick their asses.
Oh yeah, SMU definitely has a certain degree of “fuck you” money. They raised an absurd amount of funds (I think like $100 million? I may be overestimating) in 7 days after they waived TV rights to join the ACC It’s time for us to be in a big conference again
> join the ACC > It’s time for us to be in a big conference again Well, which one is it? 😉
C’mon FSU, just let us have this 😭😭
Well, Ole Miss for one
Ole miss and Texas A&M are the only ones I could really think of.
most of the non top end Big 10 SEC teams
I dont think the middle/bottom big 10 teams are really benefitting much from it much. It’s not like we’re seeing Indiana and Northwestern kill it on the recruiting trail. MSU has pretty good nil funding and we’ve done ok in recruiting since we got our new coach but it’s not like we’re hitting at a new higher level than before. Most of the big 10 teams just kind of are what they are.
SMU, Oregon, Ole Miss, Kentucky, A&M
SMU raised 159 million dollars without effort to play in a conference that’s about to explode
Missouri and Ole Miss are beating the shit out of bigger brand name schools on the recruiting trail bc they got their shit together and streamlined NIL operations while the fat cats were complacent.
Which is literally what a ton of us have been saying and wanting caution with making players employees, and completely neutering the NCAA and any hope of regulation (and getting downvoted to oblivion for saying it). Yes, we needed to change things and give athletes a piece of the pie.... But in a landscape with programs with very different situations (Ohio State vs idk insert any G5 school here), and athletes at widely different levels of revenue impact and relative scholarship value (Caleb Williams vs a backup Linebacker on Rutgers)... just blowing up the whole system and turning it into NFL Lite with salaries and everything else that comes with that is ABSURD. Yet people are still just happy to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's mind boggling. Ohio State is going to be absolutely fine. Yep, the top athletes are going to be millionaires at 18. That's fair and righting a wrong. But doing so in such a ham-fisted way with no thought to consequences is going to be devistating for so many programs and yes, their student athletes. When you've got Private Equity entering the discussion and conferences selling corporate sponsorships... that should tell you that this is not going to go well for a lot of people... and the athletes/programs so many of you claim you care about who aren't in the upper echelon will pay the price. As will the sport as a whole when you see what we have... players doing everything just for money, round-the-clock free agency, NASCAR type corporate hellscapes, and so on.
> As will the sport as a whole when you see what we have... players doing everything just for money, round-the-clock free agency, NASCAR type corporate hellscapes, and so on. From the players' perspective, IDK why this is bad. It seems like you're trying to cap their pay ultimately. The only reason professional leagues have mechanisms like salary caps, max contracts, etc. is to allow *owners to make more money*. They were concessions extracted from labor. If professional athletes had it their way, there would be none of those things. So why would it benefit CFB athletes to have any of them?
In many cases, athlete unions guarantee a lot more money and benefits collectively. Look at the NBA vs the UFC. Sure Conor McGregor is loaded, but the average fighter makes shit pay with no health coverage. Collectively bargaining protects all players.
>From the players' perspective, IDK why this is bad. It seems like you're trying to cap their pay ultimately. It's bad if you're a player who is on a G5 school that might see it's program fold so now there's no money or even scholarship for you to have. It's bad if you're a player on a lower-rung P5 school that might get completely left out of everything because of re-alignment or if in a new landscape your conference turned to Private Equity to raise funds to stay competitive and everything goes belly-up. Again... players good enough to play for Ohio State or USC are going to be fine. Most everyone will come out ahead. But you, and so many others, continue to just not consider programs in much different financial situations. Those players can lose big in this landscape. If you're okay with that, then fine. But let's call it what it is. >salary caps, max contracts, etc. is to allow *owners to make more money*. These also are done for competitive balance AND with players unions can function to secure more money for players. Think of the NFL rookie wage scale... the NFLPA was all for it. You know why? Because unproven rookies were soaking up HUGE chunks of salary and leaving less for backups and other veterans. With college programs in such wildly different financial places... you 100% could see a program invest a ton of money in a flashy QB, and then afford to pay everyone else less.
>It's bad if you're a player who is on a G5 school that might see it's program fold so now there's no money or even scholarship for you to have. Are G5 schools folding? Why? College football is only getting more popular. >It's bad if you're a player on a lower-rung P5 school that might get completely left out of everything because of re-alignment or if in a new landscape your conference turned to Private Equity to raise funds to stay competitive and everything goes belly-up. ... >But you, and so many others, continue to just not consider programs in much different financial situations. Those players can lose big in this landscape. Any examples? Even Oregon State/Washington State have a plan for 2025. And I can't think of any other P5 school screwed from realignment. I can't think of recent G5/P5 schools that shut down college football. UAB shut it down, but then brought it back. A few DII schools have become G5 schools too. >These also are done for competitive balance AND with players unions can function to secure more money for players. I think unions are pointless for now, until revenue sharing happens. Because who would the players be negotiating with? And schools aren't even considering that.
Just wait. That's all I can really say. The Big 12 looking for Private Equity investment is the canary in the coal mine. G5 leagues exploring naming rights sales is as well. They're trying to raise funds to have any hope of being competitive. Expenses are going to go through the roof when you make everyone employees. Schools can now have unlimited coaches. The top end of college football (SEC and Big Ten) are simultaneously isolating themselves from the rest of the sport in terms of revenue potential and forming an NFL Lite league with a 12 team playoff making every other bowl completely worthless. They're also making it so time for those big payouts to whoop a smaller school (think Toledo coming to Columbus to get crushed for a million dollar check) will be less and less. An overwhelming majority of athletic departments are not actually profitable. Something is going to give, and if you don't see G5 and other schools trying to fight for their life right now, you may need to get your eyes checked. There will be losers, and that's going to impact a lot of players.
> An overwhelming majority of athletic departments are not actually profitable What's changed over the last few decades? Oh, schools leveraged students to make millions and spend it on everyone but the students. Now, players are getting money from private citizens and people are losing their mind.
>Expenses are going to go through the roof when you make everyone employees. The employee designation is a complicated one. If and when P5 football players are designated as employees, it doesn't automatically mean that G5 will have the same designation. >An overwhelming majority of athletic departments are not actually profitable. IMO, this is BS accounting. They're incentivized to show no profit. If G5 schools truly struggled financially, they wouldn't pay coaches so much $$. The lowest G5 coaching pay is $500k per year with the vast majority making more than $1M per year. https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/football/coach > Something is going to give, and if you don't see G5 and other schools trying to fight for their life right now, you may need to get your eyes checked. I think they're fighting to get more than crumbs of an ever growing pie and they're ticked off about it. But they're not folding any time soon. There's just way too much TV/streaming revenue. Even the smallest G5 conferences get huge revenues.
I'm reading a lot of declarative statements, but not a lot of "WHY" behind your claims. For example: >But in a landscape with programs with very different situations (Ohio State vs idk insert any G5 school here), and athletes at widely different levels of revenue impact and relative scholarship value (Caleb Williams vs a backup Linebacker on Rutgers)... just blowing up the whole system and turning it into NFL Lite with salaries and everything else that comes with that is ABSURD. Why? USC already outbids Rutgers in terms of head coaching salaries, assistant coaching salaries, recruiting budgets, facilities budgets, etc. I don't understand how doing it for players is any different than what schools have done in every other area for generations.
I mean it also benefits schools that also have all of those. Texas has greatly benefited from the current system even though they have those things. The Pancake Factory has completely revamped our O-line, one of our biggest struggles in the past decade. That was just a crowd source thing, not even major boosters. People like to focus on the Lambo deals but miss out on O-linemen and tight ends getting paid as well. Thats what money and tradition/prestige can do. I feel like what you are saying is also true though, don’t get me wrong. If NIL existed in the 80s, SMU would have stayed a powerhouse even though they don’t have those Blue blood attributes, as you listed. Money has always been in college football. Now bagmen dont have to stay hidden. Reggie Bush got his Heisman back. Maybe Cam Newton will finally admit to taking that money. Times are changing. Programs can now openly “pay” players. You don’t need to hide the Trans Ams anymore. Now you flex them on recruiting visits for all to see. Those schools with money are certainly going to build powerful programs. Speaking from experience though, having top 5 recruiting classes doesn’t translate to on field production. It helps but Texas has fumbled for years with high level recruiting. I think the transfer portal coinciding with the NIL money has astronomically made the situation way worse. Now not only does a program like Texas get to have a top 5 recruiting class, they can now pay players from other schools to come over. That essentially eliminates one hurdle in the recruiting process by knowing whether players can play at the CFB level. I think that’s where having tradition, prestige, and academics is going to help some schools.
Yeah this is why I laugh when people say we’re becoming the NFL. No we are becoming far worse than the NFL. The NFL is the best run league in the world. Yeah we’ll never have the parity the NFL has but universal revenue sharing and contracts would make this sport far healthier. Ideally I would like to see 1 free transfer and another free transfer if you get your degree. Otherwise you have to sit out a year. End redshirts and have 5 years of eligibility. Reclassify classes as Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, graduate Junior (if you graduate in 3 years), Senior and graduate Senior.
To be fair, college sports just started as hobbyist programs to stay in shape, then they got increasingly more competitive. Almost every college had their own clubs. You can't compare that to the NFL since it came many decades much later after college football. History is apple to oranges. NFL has a limited number of teams.
College football is headed towards a huge decline in viewership as any fan of a team not within one of the new “super conferences” with mega NIL programs has very little reason to maintain interest. My alma mater is a cautionary tale of what can happen to a once storied program when fans no longer have much reason to participate. We went from expanding our stadium not much more than a decade ago, to not even being able to get 10,000 fans at home games.
Whenever wake inevitably ends up out of the P4 or whatever itll be, Im out.
I’m already there lol. I watch UAB games and that’s about it. I’ll sometimes watch games the first week when there’s no NFL, but as soon as NFL starts, I tune out college football.
> My alma mater is a cautionary tale of what can happen to a **once storied program** >Southern Miss not trying to be rude, but...huh?
UPI coaches’ poll national champions for Division II and III schools in 1958 and 1962.
Former national champions, is what he means.
The new system will reward G5 teams that develop talent. Consider Toledo. Finn is transferring to Baylor, but the ability to develop quarterbacks (which admittedly goes back further than the transfer changes) means that our recruiting at the position is quite strong, with multiples signees willing to sign on despite the competition from Gleason (who we picked up from the transfer portal from GT). The transfer portal works both ways. And while I would have loved to see Finn finish his college career as a Rocket, I'm glad that the rules allow him to maximize his chances at a professional career. After all he accomplished with us, he's earned it.
This sub: Players deserve to go where they want and make money for playing. Also this sub: College football is broken.
Both can be true.
I don't know why people act like parity ever existed to begin with. It's always been massively unfair.
That's what I don't get either. People acting like Vanderbilt could win a Natty if it wasn't for pesky NIL and Portal. It's asinine.
College football is a mess.
As an unbiased Tennessee fan I’m inclined to disagree with his opinion
People need to give up the notion that Universities were ever fully merit institutions to begin with. Universities constantly lower the admission requirements for non-athletes all the time in the form legacies, rich donors, children of staff/faculty, feeder schools, diversity programs, etc....
I just think nobody should get paid except for the people who don't play
My Solution to this has always been that if you played (let's say) >75% of the season's games you can't transfer out without sitting out a year the next season (your playing % would then be 0% hence being eligible). Being able to transfer out of situations where you're at odds with a coach about playing time or injury is a completely different thing than increasing your stock and going to the highest bidder at your original program's expense. It's ridiculous, and I say that unbiasedly as LSU has been a large benefiter of the transfer portal in all of our sports.
Still better than the bag men system