Doesn't this risk the interest of fans (at least some of us) at some point?
We are just getting started and I'm honestly already disheartened with the change from watching players come in as young pups and maturing, growing and developing over a few years.
NFL Lite with school logos attached for some reason ... just seems like it'll be really odd at some point.
Doesn't this risk the interest of fans (at least some of us) at some point?
We are just getting started and I'm honestly already disheartened with the change from watching players come in as young pups and maturing, growing and developing over a few years.
NFL Lite with school logos attached for some reason ... just seems like it'll be really odd at some point.
I doubt the powers-that-be and the Supreme Court care about your or my interest. That is the hard truth. The Supreme Court determined the players could not be exploited by their schools. I agree. The NIL program is the answer. And all the media outlets now compete for content and have a lot of money to throw at it. So as long as we have free markets and media companies can bid whatever they want to gain access to that content, the money will be there to bid up coaches pay and indirectly, NIL payouts.
A CFB players union is on the way and salary caps and restrictions on transfers will be negotiated by the comparatively few schools still playing big time CFB.
I think most schools will abhor paying FUCA, FICA, state retirement contributions, etc. along not being able to drop a starter to 2nd string without an administrative hearing?
If pay for play becomes the norm as it likely will, football and all indicia of the football program will be licensed to a 3rd party.
NIL is in the form of a trust fund. Players are not salaried employees. But maybe you meant that in jest. The primary point is big money will cause havoc with college football and already has
The players are salaried employees of the entity making the NIL payments in exchange for the assignment of a player's NIL rights. The folks receiving NIL payments are employees, are 1099'd and subject to federal and state income tax.
And NIL recipients are not limited to men playing football and basketball. Many the woman 'student-athlete' has signed lucrative NIL deals. AS it should be.
Size goes to size in business. The 2 Power Conferences, the B1G and the SEC, are in the process of growing CFB and CBB by adding financially impactful programs. I do not see this coming to a halt.
We have already seen legislation introduced, so far quashed, that would require universities to directly employ and pay student athletes. I think it is inevitable that the biggest brands will continue to consolidate and leave smaller brands behind and unable to compete at the highest level.
Do I personally like this trend? No. But I also don't like my local book stores closing because they cannot compete with Amazon.
I think in CFB we will ultimately see 'NFL-Lite.' And I think we will see many schools offering athletic scholarships today going the way of the Ivy League/D3.
I am not alone in this belief. Far brighter and more successful people than I, including Phil Knight, have predicted that in CFB we are headed to a 32 or so team Super League.
Pandora's Box has been opened. Bully for the athlete's who are being 'paid' but I am afraid that the number of athletes receiving scholarship aid will as consequence diminish in the relatively near future.
I don't disagree with anything you say. I thought the NILs were structured as a trust and trusts are not taxable until money is withdrawn. But I have no expertise in this area and you might be right on that. Yes, once the Supreme Court granted the NIL payments to athletes, the entire idea of "amateur status" was out the window. But then it was for Olympic athletes 40 years ago or so. As much as college players risk and the commitment required in time to be at the top makes academics secondary. This is just a form of paid entertainment. Fewer "donors" will be interested in paying for college programs if the corporations take over for the marketing of the
athletes. I don't think this will be limited to 32 teams. I think all the FBS will be involved, though the rewards will be biggest for the best. Small colleges will still have their own relatively amateur programs, not because the kids don't want the money but because their level of skill does not permit them to compete against the best. And just as in the NFL, not everyone will get top dollar which is already in place. The O and D lines, the TE and LBs will get paid significantly less. But caps should be put in place for competitive reasons. The end product is no good if lopsided. There must be a little uncertainty in the game to keep it interesting. Today's NFL has a nice blend of competitiveness with the worst teams getting the best draft picks along with revenue sharing on media deals (already in place within a conference). Some element of drafting players and not just paying the largest amount must come to this new breed of FBS football. That will be interesting
I would say college football already has suffered from the very uneven "playing field" created by conferences and their agenda to win Championships at any cost (Oregon and USC being two very good examples of this). Those with the biggest markets and the most avaricious ADs and boosters will win this game of money and influence until there is nothing left of competitiveness and so no real season, just a playoff of 3 or 4 games between the Top 20. This is what happened in the NFL and MLB as well, until salary caps and revenue sharing was put into place to restore competition. It also what has happened in Indy car, NASCAR and Formula 1 racing where cars and their setups are heavily regulated both for safety and competition. Div 1 football needs to get there at some point, but first the sport needs to be destroyed by excessive ambition. The big programs will need to agree to throttle their excesses.
Doesn't this risk the interest of fans (at least some of us) at some point?
We are just getting started and I'm honestly already disheartened with the change from watching players come in as young pups and maturing, growing and developing over a few years.
NFL Lite with school logos attached for some reason ... just seems like it'll be really odd at some point.
I doubt the powers-that-be and the Supreme Court care about your or my interest. That is the hard truth. The Supreme Court determined the players could not be exploited by their schools. I agree. The NIL program is the answer. And all the media outlets now compete for content and have a lot of money to throw at it. So as long as we have free markets and media companies can bid whatever they want to gain access to that content, the money will be there to bid up coaches pay and indirectly, NIL payouts.
A CFB players union is on the way and salary caps and restrictions on transfers will be negotiated by the comparatively few schools still playing big time CFB.
I actually think paying them directly + NIL on top is the answer, as it would allow for collective bargaining and some rules here.
The sport will really suffer eventually if it's just the handful of teams that want to go bananas in an unregulated NIL free for all.
I think most schools will abhor paying FUCA, FICA, state retirement contributions, etc. along not being able to drop a starter to 2nd string without an administrative hearing?
If pay for play becomes the norm as it likely will, football and all indicia of the football program will be licensed to a 3rd party.
NIL is in the form of a trust fund. Players are not salaried employees. But maybe you meant that in jest. The primary point is big money will cause havoc with college football and already has
Thanks Brian.
The players are salaried employees of the entity making the NIL payments in exchange for the assignment of a player's NIL rights. The folks receiving NIL payments are employees, are 1099'd and subject to federal and state income tax.
And NIL recipients are not limited to men playing football and basketball. Many the woman 'student-athlete' has signed lucrative NIL deals. AS it should be.
Size goes to size in business. The 2 Power Conferences, the B1G and the SEC, are in the process of growing CFB and CBB by adding financially impactful programs. I do not see this coming to a halt.
We have already seen legislation introduced, so far quashed, that would require universities to directly employ and pay student athletes. I think it is inevitable that the biggest brands will continue to consolidate and leave smaller brands behind and unable to compete at the highest level.
Do I personally like this trend? No. But I also don't like my local book stores closing because they cannot compete with Amazon.
I think in CFB we will ultimately see 'NFL-Lite.' And I think we will see many schools offering athletic scholarships today going the way of the Ivy League/D3.
I am not alone in this belief. Far brighter and more successful people than I, including Phil Knight, have predicted that in CFB we are headed to a 32 or so team Super League.
Pandora's Box has been opened. Bully for the athlete's who are being 'paid' but I am afraid that the number of athletes receiving scholarship aid will as consequence diminish in the relatively near future.
I don't disagree with anything you say. I thought the NILs were structured as a trust and trusts are not taxable until money is withdrawn. But I have no expertise in this area and you might be right on that. Yes, once the Supreme Court granted the NIL payments to athletes, the entire idea of "amateur status" was out the window. But then it was for Olympic athletes 40 years ago or so. As much as college players risk and the commitment required in time to be at the top makes academics secondary. This is just a form of paid entertainment. Fewer "donors" will be interested in paying for college programs if the corporations take over for the marketing of the
athletes. I don't think this will be limited to 32 teams. I think all the FBS will be involved, though the rewards will be biggest for the best. Small colleges will still have their own relatively amateur programs, not because the kids don't want the money but because their level of skill does not permit them to compete against the best. And just as in the NFL, not everyone will get top dollar which is already in place. The O and D lines, the TE and LBs will get paid significantly less. But caps should be put in place for competitive reasons. The end product is no good if lopsided. There must be a little uncertainty in the game to keep it interesting. Today's NFL has a nice blend of competitiveness with the worst teams getting the best draft picks along with revenue sharing on media deals (already in place within a conference). Some element of drafting players and not just paying the largest amount must come to this new breed of FBS football. That will be interesting
I would say college football already has suffered from the very uneven "playing field" created by conferences and their agenda to win Championships at any cost (Oregon and USC being two very good examples of this). Those with the biggest markets and the most avaricious ADs and boosters will win this game of money and influence until there is nothing left of competitiveness and so no real season, just a playoff of 3 or 4 games between the Top 20. This is what happened in the NFL and MLB as well, until salary caps and revenue sharing was put into place to restore competition. It also what has happened in Indy car, NASCAR and Formula 1 racing where cars and their setups are heavily regulated both for safety and competition. Div 1 football needs to get there at some point, but first the sport needs to be destroyed by excessive ambition. The big programs will need to agree to throttle their excesses.