Recent Comments

Doesn't seem to be any interest in continuing this....I guess the idea has run its course.

This. Those couple years were magical. Wish she'd have just gone pro last year, but it seems like she probably did boost her stock some. Good for her.

That's fair, and true... I don't think it changes anything about what I said... yes, there is inequity amongst the most passionate CFB fans, and a small handful are driving the market.

I don't think that's a solvable problem. Amateurism isn't enforceable (without subpoena power).

Why are the mega donors paying that money? There are people willing to pay money to win because of their fandom. The fact that you are a fan and you disagree doesn't mean that everyone who calls themselves a fan disagrees. Sure, it's a skewed distribution, but the fandom is still the driver.

"fans are willing to pay money to win."- nonsense. "Fans" complain about paying for the spring game and the cost to stream games and ticket prices etc- constantly. Mega Boosters- the same people that sit in suites at NFL games- are paying to win now. Not "fans"

market value largely is not driving these NIL deals. When 10% of the funding for the payment comes from true NIL deals with businesses and the other 90% is donors throwing wads of cash, you have a clear market failure.

These aren't NIL deals. They are pay-for-play. That's the market I'm talking about. Fans want to win, and fans are willing to pay money to win.

So the biggest brands may attract the top talent for an NFL Lite (which I don't think is going to have staying power long-term), but the rest of FBS may adopt some sort of modified amateurism.

Working fine (from a business perspective) for European soccer.

Replying to your edit:

Long-term, I think the tv networks are missing the fact that so much of the viewership from college football is from fans of schools across the country who follow and love the sport.

I think this might have been true a decade or two ago, but I don't think that's the case any more. I don't think college students are planning 9am to 1am around college football outside of their school/conference. Gen Z and younger millennials don't do this. Older Millenials and Gen X are starting to have families/not have time for this.

Consolidating the top brands I think is going to alienate and hurt a large chunk of their viewership, and at that point they're just competing against the NFL. Who wants to watch a glorified developmental league head-to-head vs the NFL if you're a casual viewer?

This is the point that I think you're wrong on. The casual fan, who doesn't know what a message board is, who just likes sports, who makes up the majority of viewership, wants fewer, more recognizable teams. That person cares about Penn State vs Oregon. That person has zero interest in WVU vs Pitt.

If you're a sicko on a message board, you get WVU vs Pitt, and that game is going to interest you any weekend. But that's not the bulk of viewers.

Eventually an Ohio State or Alabama will get tired of sharing revenue even with a small elite group and we'll end up back in decentralized regional conferences where they can be the big dog against lesser competition.

I do think this is the inevitable outcome. 20ish teams in a super league, 2-6 mid-major conferences with 8-16 teams each, then a new layer in between the FCS and the new-mid-major.

And even if that does happen, it doesn't have to be terrible. It could even be better than things are now.

So he has a potential second year of eligibility left, has he'll have to petition the NCAA for that year after he has exhausted his eligibility (after one more year).

Which means, since he won't be playing for VT, he'll have a guaranteed two years of eligibility left.

The sad thing is that when I read this "maybe one of the OL who have been in the program a couple of years and aren't progressing" my immediate thought was wouldn't that include every offensive lineman we have that has been in the program a couple of years?

I'm sure some have shown some benefit. I have no ability to rate them like you and others have. But it gave me a real 'ugh' moment.

Amateurism will never be back. These players have shown that their roster spots have value to the people who fund athletic departments.

This is very true - however, market value largely is not driving these NIL deals. When 10% of the funding for the payment comes from true NIL deals with businesses and the other 90% is donors throwing wads of cash, you have a clear market failure. I think this is just going to be the separation of a small group of top elite schools/brands who want to continue to spend this amount of money on college athletics, with the rest of FBS forming a lower division. And given that there are probably only approximately 30 or so schools who will spend like this and have the brand recognition (and that might be being generous - I'm also still waiting for the SEC and Big Ten to shed some of their deadweight as far as revenue), that still leaves a ton of college athletes who need to find a home somewhere.

So the biggest brands may attract the top talent for an NFL Lite (which I don't think is going to have staying power long-term), but the rest of FBS may adopt some sort of modified amateurism. Long-term, I think the tv networks are missing the fact that so much of the viewership from college football is from fans of schools across the country who follow and love the sport. Consolidating the top brands I think is going to alienate and hurt a large chunk of their viewership, and at that point they're just competing against the NFL. Who wants to watch a glorified developmental league head-to-head vs the NFL if you're a casual viewer? Eventually an Ohio State or Alabama will get tired of sharing revenue even with a small elite group and we'll end up back in decentralized regional conferences where they can be the big dog against lesser competition.

"Contracts come with buyouts/transfer fees"- This won't change a damn thing. You think a buyout would have stopped LSU from pursuing Delane? no chance.

But it could get us another 6 figures that could be used to land the next delane.

What I want is a governing body, amateurism rules in terms of academics and years eligible and true/traceable/legitimate NIL.

Amateurism will never be back. These players have shown that their roster spots have value to the people who fund athletic departments.

It 100% sucks that she'll be listed as Georgia Amoore - Kentucky, but if it wasn't for her most of you wouldn't care at all about women's basketball and her transferring can't take away that we went to the Final Four when she was a Hokie.

I still remember from the old PS2/XBox versions if you broke off a ridiculous QB run, Corso would say "Kirk, there are no words to describe what we just saw there." And Herbstreit said, "Yeah coach, kind of reminds you of some guy who used to play for Virginia Tech."

If there's a cap on school spending, buyouts would need to be part of it. Means there's still a market for top-end players, but it would roll off quickly.

And what you're describing is the plan, at least for true NIL, right? There's the schools paying the athletes, which is capped, and an actual NIL clearinghouse to ensure that any additional money coming in is real and traceable, and is commensurate with some idea of actual value. I don't want to be the person actually deciding any of that, sounds like a miserable, thankless job. But, it's at least in the cards.

I remember that cat was the only piece of their defense who was really concerning to me. Grubbs ended up having a good game, but if both of them had played the whole game it would have been far more interesting.

Pages