+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: College Sports and Conference Realignment (/forum-637.html)
+----- Forum: P5 Discussion (/forum-997.html)
+----- Thread: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! (/thread-849142.html)
The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - JRsec - 04-30-2018 04:13 PM
What would the college football world look like if a Federal Court rules that there can be no cap on "Stipends"?
First of all why would they make this ruling? That answer is simple. Taxing the under the table revenue earned by "student athletes" cleans up a lot of corruption. Suddenly apparel companies could operate above board for sponsorship. The Federal Government could tax the revenue and acknowledge the business overhead on returns. For them it solves a lot of issues related to the surreptitious nature of college recruiting and corporate sponsorship.
What would such a ruling mean for the P5 and more generally for FBS football? It would mean a colossal shift between the myth of amateurism and the reality of pay for play. It would essentially make the competition for players much more lucrative for the players and at the same time much more costly for the programs.
Without a relatively low cost in terms of player overhead the profits of college football programs could be severely curtailed for many mid tier programs, too much to handle for many privates and less funded P5 and lower tier FBS programs, and it would create a totally competitive market for talent by those who accepted their new quasi professional programs. The choice to compete squarely as amateurs would be a compelling avenue to pursue for those who don't want, and can't afford, bidding wars for talent. Notre Dame's administration has already stated they wouldn't pursue a pay for play world.
There is no way to know which schools would pursue football at the more expensive level of play, and which ones would abandon football, or try to pursue it more strictly upon amateur guidelines. My suspicion is that amateurism would be much more enforceable in a CFB world that segregated pay for play from scholarship only athletes. Why? Fear of prosecution by the IRS.
No doubt some of the wealthiest brands would use this as an opportunity to separate themselves from the rest of the FBS and would enjoy a lucrative enough TV contract that it would likely assist the formation of a new League as opposed to conferences.
What I am going to make now is merely a guess as to what that might look like.
From the SEC: Everyone with the exception of Vanderbilt would likely opt to pay players.
From the Big 12: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, West Virginia, and possibly T.C.U. might purse this. For the cost I don't see Kansas or Kansas State pursuing pay for play but that's just my guess. I think Baylor would bow out and possibly Iowa State as well.
From the PAC: U.S.C., U.C.L.A., Washington, Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon, and Utah might pursue it.
From the Big 10: Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Penn State might pursue it.
From the ACC: Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, and possibly N.C. State, possibly North Carolina might pursue it.
So if this guess is anywhere close to being true we might well see 40 of the present 65 P5 schools make the jump to pay for play.
This could open the door for the top G5 programs who were willing to make that commitment to step up.
But anyway you cut it, if this occurs the shift creates an entirely new world and a somewhat more realistic division of schools than the current system provides.
The ruling on the cap of stipends likely has everything on hold with regards to realignment because if the cap is removed then the realignment efforts and the corresponding rights renewals and negotiations are rendered entirely moot.
If the stipend is removed the FBI investigations can stop except for the completion of the investigations into past transgressions.
So it seems to me that everything will hinge upon this decision. If status quo is maintained then possible movement during the upcoming rights negotiations is likely. If the caps are removed then we head into a completely new era, and one that will likely sweep away conferences as we have known them. Then the ushering in of a new Upper Tier Pay for Play League will likely become a reality and it could be comprised of anywhere between a couple of dozen to four dozen schools.
As much as I hate change, if this happens, it will at least be more honest than the representation of so called amateurism we pretend to have today. And perhaps the pay and the paying of taxes teaches the young men who play that society doesn't have to be a dodge or scam and that their integrity is something that can be built instead of something they have to deny in order to get ahead.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - XLance - 04-30-2018 08:48 PM
In the ACC, 8 would be out for sure:
Boston College
Syracuse
Pitt
UVa
Duke
Wake Forest
Carolina
Georgia Tech
BTW, Notre Dame is on record as saying that they would be "out" too.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - BePcr07 - 04-30-2018 10:54 PM
Going with JR’s list and X’s ACC opt outs (but including Miami who wasn’t listed on either), we could see these new conferences:
B1G
West: Washington, Oregon, USC, UCLA
South: Arizona, Arizona St, Utah, TCU
Central: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St
North: Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin
East: Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St
SEC
West: Texas A&M, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU
Central: Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn
North: Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisville, West Virginia
East: Virginia Tech, North Carolina St, South Carolina, Clemson
South: Georgia, Florida, Florida St, Miami
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - arkstfan - 05-01-2018 08:16 AM
If virtually unrestricted pay to play rolls in, that's not good news for anyone in an NFL city or in parts of the country where the NFL is significantly more popular than college football.
College football being rebranded as a truly minor league football is big hit.
The next problem that then pops up is the "artificial" cap on four years of playing. Why would Joe Almost But Not Quite Good Enough for NFL willingly give up a living wage doing what he is good at? My argument representing him is that when it became an occupation, the eligibility restriction of four years playing is an artificial construct and conspiracy to deflate wages.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - Hokie Mark - 05-01-2018 10:05 AM
If college football becomes minor league pro ball, why not just watch the NFL at that point?
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - JRsec - 05-01-2018 10:25 AM
(05-01-2018 08:16 AM)arkstfan Wrote: If virtually unrestricted pay to play rolls in, that's not good news for anyone in an NFL city or in parts of the country where the NFL is significantly more popular than college football.
College football being rebranded as a truly minor league football is big hit.
The next problem that then pops up is the "artificial" cap on four years of playing. Why would Joe Almost But Not Quite Good Enough for NFL willingly give up a living wage doing what he is good at? My argument representing him is that when it became an occupation, the eligibility restriction of four years playing is an artificial construct and conspiracy to deflate wages.
That's an interesting angle of which the Federal Judge will need to be made aware. My bet is if we go that route some form of hybridization will created. They'll find a way to still classify them as student athletes and still pay them. Then the student classification will remain with a reasonable span included for eligibility probably approximating the average student's time spent to graduate, say 5-6 years of which playing eligibility may be restricted to 4 full years' worth of game eligibility.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - SMUmustangs - 05-01-2018 10:50 AM
What about basketball?
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - Wedge - 05-01-2018 11:02 AM
(05-01-2018 10:25 AM)JRsec Wrote:(05-01-2018 08:16 AM)arkstfan Wrote: If virtually unrestricted pay to play rolls in, that's not good news for anyone in an NFL city or in parts of the country where the NFL is significantly more popular than college football.
College football being rebranded as a truly minor league football is big hit.
The next problem that then pops up is the "artificial" cap on four years of playing. Why would Joe Almost But Not Quite Good Enough for NFL willingly give up a living wage doing what he is good at? My argument representing him is that when it became an occupation, the eligibility restriction of four years playing is an artificial construct and conspiracy to deflate wages.
That's an interesting angle of which the Federal Judge will need to be made aware. My bet is if we go that route some form of hybridization will created. They'll find a way to still classify them as student athletes and still pay them. Then the student classification will remain with a reasonable span included for eligibility probably approximating the average student's time spent to graduate, say 5-6 years of which playing eligibility may be restricted to 4 full years' worth of game eligibility.
If you make your "college" football and basketball association a U-24 league (e.g., to be eligible you have to have not reached your 24th birthday before August 1st), then the idea of playing for 10 years after high school is eliminated. Maybe there would be some colleges that want their associated teams to have 30-year-old players; those colleges could have an association with different rules.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - arkstfan - 05-01-2018 11:25 AM
(05-01-2018 11:02 AM)Wedge Wrote:(05-01-2018 10:25 AM)JRsec Wrote:(05-01-2018 08:16 AM)arkstfan Wrote: If virtually unrestricted pay to play rolls in, that's not good news for anyone in an NFL city or in parts of the country where the NFL is significantly more popular than college football.
College football being rebranded as a truly minor league football is big hit.
The next problem that then pops up is the "artificial" cap on four years of playing. Why would Joe Almost But Not Quite Good Enough for NFL willingly give up a living wage doing what he is good at? My argument representing him is that when it became an occupation, the eligibility restriction of four years playing is an artificial construct and conspiracy to deflate wages.
That's an interesting angle of which the Federal Judge will need to be made aware. My bet is if we go that route some form of hybridization will created. They'll find a way to still classify them as student athletes and still pay them. Then the student classification will remain with a reasonable span included for eligibility probably approximating the average student's time spent to graduate, say 5-6 years of which playing eligibility may be restricted to 4 full years' worth of game eligibility.
If you make your "college" football and basketball association a U-24 league (e.g., to be eligible you have to have not reached your 24th birthday before August 1st), then the idea of playing for 10 years after high school is eliminated. Maybe there would be some colleges that want their associated teams to have 30-year-old players; those colleges could have an association with different rules.
What is more likely to happen is schools wash their hands of managing and running such and instead license the use of their trademarks to investors running the U-24 league.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - Wedge - 05-01-2018 11:42 AM
(05-01-2018 11:25 AM)arkstfan Wrote:(05-01-2018 11:02 AM)Wedge Wrote:(05-01-2018 10:25 AM)JRsec Wrote:(05-01-2018 08:16 AM)arkstfan Wrote: If virtually unrestricted pay to play rolls in, that's not good news for anyone in an NFL city or in parts of the country where the NFL is significantly more popular than college football.
College football being rebranded as a truly minor league football is big hit.
The next problem that then pops up is the "artificial" cap on four years of playing. Why would Joe Almost But Not Quite Good Enough for NFL willingly give up a living wage doing what he is good at? My argument representing him is that when it became an occupation, the eligibility restriction of four years playing is an artificial construct and conspiracy to deflate wages.
That's an interesting angle of which the Federal Judge will need to be made aware. My bet is if we go that route some form of hybridization will created. They'll find a way to still classify them as student athletes and still pay them. Then the student classification will remain with a reasonable span included for eligibility probably approximating the average student's time spent to graduate, say 5-6 years of which playing eligibility may be restricted to 4 full years' worth of game eligibility.
If you make your "college" football and basketball association a U-24 league (e.g., to be eligible you have to have not reached your 24th birthday before August 1st), then the idea of playing for 10 years after high school is eliminated. Maybe there would be some colleges that want their associated teams to have 30-year-old players; those colleges could have an association with different rules.
What is more likely to happen is schools wash their hands of managing and running such and instead license the use of their trademarks to investors running the U-24 league.
They'd have to arrange for a lot of other things as well, such as the use of university facilities including stadiums and arenas. The companies running the teams would be like the private companies that have contracts with the university that allow them to operate restaurants or bookstores on campus.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - arkstfan - 05-01-2018 12:14 PM
(05-01-2018 11:42 AM)Wedge Wrote:(05-01-2018 11:25 AM)arkstfan Wrote:(05-01-2018 11:02 AM)Wedge Wrote:(05-01-2018 10:25 AM)JRsec Wrote:(05-01-2018 08:16 AM)arkstfan Wrote: If virtually unrestricted pay to play rolls in, that's not good news for anyone in an NFL city or in parts of the country where the NFL is significantly more popular than college football.
College football being rebranded as a truly minor league football is big hit.
The next problem that then pops up is the "artificial" cap on four years of playing. Why would Joe Almost But Not Quite Good Enough for NFL willingly give up a living wage doing what he is good at? My argument representing him is that when it became an occupation, the eligibility restriction of four years playing is an artificial construct and conspiracy to deflate wages.
That's an interesting angle of which the Federal Judge will need to be made aware. My bet is if we go that route some form of hybridization will created. They'll find a way to still classify them as student athletes and still pay them. Then the student classification will remain with a reasonable span included for eligibility probably approximating the average student's time spent to graduate, say 5-6 years of which playing eligibility may be restricted to 4 full years' worth of game eligibility.
If you make your "college" football and basketball association a U-24 league (e.g., to be eligible you have to have not reached your 24th birthday before August 1st), then the idea of playing for 10 years after high school is eliminated. Maybe there would be some colleges that want their associated teams to have 30-year-old players; those colleges could have an association with different rules.
What is more likely to happen is schools wash their hands of managing and running such and instead license the use of their trademarks to investors running the U-24 league.
They'd have to arrange for a lot of other things as well, such as the use of university facilities including stadiums and arenas. The companies running the teams would be like the private companies that have contracts with the university that allow them to operate restaurants or bookstores on campus.
Exactly transfer the risk to someone else while guaranteeing a revenue stream.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - bullet - 05-01-2018 02:29 PM
(05-01-2018 10:50 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote: What about basketball?
I could see a lot of schools dropping football if that were to happen, but keeping basketball. Its one thing to do it for 15 players, quite another to do it for 100.
You could have an eastern private league-BC, Syracuse, Duke, Wake Forest, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Rice, Tulane, maybe Miami.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - JRsec - 05-01-2018 03:08 PM
(05-01-2018 02:29 PM)bullet Wrote:(05-01-2018 10:50 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote: What about basketball?
I could see a lot of schools dropping football if that were to happen, but keeping basketball. Its one thing to do it for 15 players, quite another to do it for 100.
You could have an eastern private league-BC, Syracuse, Duke, Wake Forest, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Rice, Tulane, maybe Miami.
I could easily see Pitt in that lineup as well along with a few others. Temple, UConn, etc. I realize UConn is a public but I think there would be some that would opt for this kind of conference.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - Nerdlinger - 05-01-2018 04:51 PM
JR, your opt-in list is based mainly on finances and football focus? How about Miami or Colorado?
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - ken d - 05-01-2018 05:20 PM
(05-01-2018 10:05 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: If college football becomes minor league pro ball, why not just watch the NFL at that point?
Don't most college football fans also watch the NFL now? Do you suppose Alabama fans would stop watching the Tide if they paid their players above the table?
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - JRsec - 05-01-2018 05:34 PM
(05-01-2018 04:51 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote: JR, your opt-in list is based mainly on finances and football focus? How about Miami or Colorado?
Miami's ability to pump money into football was called into question by Shalala. It may be the moment when they decide that the pursuit of it isn't in their long term interest. But both Colorado and Miami are hard to classify. Colorado's love of football isn't as deep as say that of Nebraska or Oklahoma, and their desires to be in the PAC were less about football than about culture and academic pursuits. Those two could go either way.
But if we do divide it will be about finances and football focus (culture).
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - Hokie Mark - 05-01-2018 05:42 PM
(05-01-2018 05:20 PM)ken d Wrote:(05-01-2018 10:05 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: If college football becomes minor league pro ball, why not just watch the NFL at that point?
Don't most college football fans also watch the NFL now? Do you suppose Alabama fans would stop watching the Tide if they paid their players above the table?
Not at first, but when you start down that road... at some point what's the difference between the semi-pro teams in Tuscaloosa and Birmingham? The more the game changes, the less it looks like college football.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - JRsec - 05-01-2018 06:01 PM
(05-01-2018 05:42 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:(05-01-2018 05:20 PM)ken d Wrote:(05-01-2018 10:05 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: If college football becomes minor league pro ball, why not just watch the NFL at that point?
Don't most college football fans also watch the NFL now? Do you suppose Alabama fans would stop watching the Tide if they paid their players above the table?
Not at first, but when you start down that road... at some point what's the difference between the semi-pro teams in Tuscaloosa and Birmingham? The more the game changes, the less it looks like college football.
Look, it quit being behemoth good ole boys posing as students a long time ago. That was as close to amateurism as we ever really were. Most schools have been paying players in one form or another for decades and I mean at least 5 if not 6 of them. The money has gotten ooldles bigger in the last 30 however.
That money is untaxed and that's a Federal Issue that should have been addressed long long ago. The very nature of what happens tells cynical kids used to corrupt dealings that it is no different for the wealthy, the middle class, or anybody. That means that most of them never really blend in with a society that they hold in contempt. If for no other reason than changing that trajectory into something more positive we owe it these kids to pay them in a way that is on the up and up where they can feel like growing into good citizens is attainable.
People in the South will root for the jersey. If they adapted to the game when it was integrated, they'll adapt to it when the players are paid. They will continue to flock to the games and pull for the school. They've had a generation and a half to learn that those kids are for the most part not really students anyway.
Let's give them educations that they can handle, and that teach them important life skills unless of course they are the exception that happens to be an excellent student in addition to being an athlete.
They need to learn how to dress, how to manage their money, learn about sports law, learn how to coach, and how to market their image in ways that appeals to corporate America. Do that for them and they will feel blessed to have had the association and when they return for functions at the schools the fans will love them for it. Right now we use them and when they don't make it we've given them precious little to fall back upon.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - Fighting Muskie - 05-01-2018 07:54 PM
What would payroll be collegiate semi-pro football?
Are colleges really going to be willing to eschew all traces of amateurism and strike out with a bold new plan like this?
In the South you could concievably have a a fall amateur season and then in spring hold a semi-pro, 10 week season where seniors, underclassmen declaring for the draft, and alums playing.
The trouble with previous start up leagues is finding a fan base but if the teams were directly tied to major universities with big fan bases the fans are already built in. Finding fans for a Birmingham XFL or AAF team might be a challenge but if you put that team in Crimson I think you pick up a substantial following. Eventually you might see a shift to where fans care more about the spring league than the fall league and the top H.S. players skip he amateur team and go straight to semi-pro.
RE: The 800lb Gorilla That Nobody is Talking About Which Could Turn the P5 On Its Ear! - arkstfan - 05-01-2018 08:48 PM
(05-01-2018 05:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:(05-01-2018 04:51 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote: JR, your opt-in list is based mainly on finances and football focus? How about Miami or Colorado?
Miami's ability to pump money into football was called into question by Shalala. It may be the moment when they decide that the pursuit of it isn't in their long term interest. But both Colorado and Miami are hard to classify. Colorado's love of football isn't as deep as say that of Nebraska or Oklahoma, and their desires to be in the PAC were less about football than about culture and academic pursuits. Those two could go either way.
But if we do divide it will be about finances and football focus (culture).
I don't think finances are going to make any difference in the decision a school makes.
AL.com says Bama had a surplus of $15.6 million. Spread that around in football and basketball and you are looking at an average wage of roughly $200,000 assuming all the surplus goes to wages and is on top of what is already allocated for scholarships and stipends.
Is that going to price Arkansas State or Houston out of the game?
Not at all.
How many football players holding a committable offer from AState, Houston and Alabama are going to sign with AState or Houston? The answer is zero or incredibly close to zero.
Only thing that changes is that the player going to Alabama is going to get more than a scholarship and roughly $500 a month and access to a senior study abroad spot paid for that the A-State player will get.
The Houston's and Arkansas State's are going to end up signing essentially the same athletes they already sign.
Saturday night I can go watch "pro" soccer in Little Rock with our NPSL team. What do the players get? They get to play and develop their game, they get housing meals, a uniform and some practice gear and they have more players wanting on the squad than they have spots for.
Will you see some players ditch their school when they do well to have a chance to play for a richer team? Absolutely but Nebraska started a Tulane transfer this year who already did that without a hundred grand salary. The Sun Belt saw their freshman of the year in three consecutive basketball seasons transfer to power five schools. The first pick of the NFL draft and Heisman Trophy winner transferred to OU from Texas Tech.
The bigger change will be the guys who aren't cutting it. Right now you don't see a lot of guys who don't pan out being pushed out the door. When that guy is collecting $10,000 a month? They are going to invited to leave much more often. An Alabama wash-out made honorable mention All-Sun Belt this year, not the best at his position but good enough to start, you will see more of them.
The culture of the school and the school's philosophy toward athletics will determine who competes on salary and who steps out of the rat race.
Nothing changes really for Memphis and Fresno State, UNLESS there are number of significant schools who say we aren't going to professionalize whether they choose to invite schools who don't go professional because they don't have the resources.