So are we saying that in the current form, being a member of a team is employment? I get that’s where it’s heading, but based on actual definitions of employees I don’t think we are there now
1 Like
My point is, the quest for everyone to maximize the money to everyone - the people who have been getting it for years (schools, ADs, conference leaders, coaches) and the people who haven’t (players) - will lead to myopic and selfish decisions. Someone needs to step up and say “let’s figure out how to make this work so the money is distributed, players are given some form of a voice/benefits, but the overall sport isn’t destroyed in the process.”
I’m not smart enough to know what that looks like, but I know it isn’t the model we have today and it isn’t a super-league that’s NFL/NBA lite minor league system. So get some smart, creative people together and figure out some options. I fear that real issue is that the NCAA is too big and serving too many objectives to truly figure it out. Perhaps individual conferences should create their own leagues and then sometimes play each other similar to Euro soccer.
I know you’re asking a question but I agree with your rhetorical point
Don’t know!
In some ways fixing the competitive balance problem is much easier if there is employment. Make the athletes sign contracts.
1 Like
Extremely doubtful that will ever happen, could see a high major mid season type tournament like the nba does. However, the tv networks know the magic including everyone creates for march madness.
But if the big schools break off how will that even work?
No one is giving any real foresight, just making decisions based on (primarily) football money
1 Like
One wacky idea I’ve thought about is this - focus on the conferences and have them create their own business model for their two revenue sports (football and basketball). If you choose to attend a B10 school then you choose their form of revenue sharing, benefits, etc. They negotiate their exclusive TV contract and share that how they see fit. As such, there will be “contracts” signed with recruits and transfers that provide some level of control for the schools and conference while making sure the players are fairly compensated.
Your schedule is predominantly against your fellow conference members (which is fine given the super conferences like we already have). In basketball there would be a couple of in-season showcase tournaments against other leagues not unlike the MTEs we see today. That can be against the smaller leagues which will remain under an NCAA model similar to today since they don’t generate enough revenue to “turn pro” or against the other “power leagues”. Those would be similar to Champions League or Europa league. The NCAA tournament or CFP are now essentially the “finals” of those rival leagues in-season tournaments.
Now you keep sports like rowing or wrestling under a similar NCAA structure to today while the revenue sports can operate a little differently.
1 Like
You were literally just explaining how the top 40 schools are going to breakaway to make super conferences based on football.
If there’s a FOX league (Big Ten) and a ESPN league (SEC) … You think they are going to be worried about letting in people not in their leagues into their postseason?
“It works for CFB, we will do the same thing and steal the magic!”
1 Like
Euro soccer type model is the model imo. Just because the high majors are paying players doesn’t mean they cant compete against everyone else. Baker proposal seems like a good starting point and if the b1g and sec have actual leadership they should be working on implementing some form of it asap.
Them being in a separate tier does not prevent them from playing other teams not in that tier and no I do not think they will take the ncaa tournament away.
Ok, but does it prevent them from sharing their revenue from the mega profitable postseason that everyone wants a piece of?
No I don’t think they will, there will be way to much pressure politically and from fans to do that.
Let’s just go back to no NIL. No one caring. No legal stuff out there.
And we just complain about bags.
The issue with Baker’s proposal, at least from a viability stand point, is that it basically was completely Title IX focused. I’m a dumb dumb about title IX but there’s really no way to give football players revenue sharing without giving the women’s field hockey team the same amount? Doesn’t make sense to me
I think the key question is: “If the NCAA rules didn’t exist, would there be a robust market for college basketball players?” And the answer is clearly yes
I think Title-9 complicates things but I’m guessing there is flexibility since that’s about equal opportunity. You have to provide the same number of scholarships to both genders. If football turns pro and scholarships go away then that probably gets you out of it as long as the remaining scholarship sports are equal. Perhaps there’s something else where if a women’s sport generates revenue on its own that needs to be shared with the players…but that’s not the same as saying “Fox is giving Michigan football a trilliion dollars from the playoff appearance so we have to give some to women’s field hockey.”
Right the other issue here is that in an open market, Football players would make out like bandits, mens basketball players a bit less so, and then maybe a few women’s hoopers, baseball players at like 5 schools, hockey players at like 5 schools, and maybe someday a few women’s volleyball players.
Again, the original sin here, I think, is making college athletics (any sport) into a major business. Everything branching off that is sort of poisoned.
1 Like
It’s not just about scholarships, you essentially have to spend as much per athlete on men’s and women’s sports. So yes it does complicate things.
1 Like
You just have to pay the same amount to womens athletes that you pay mens athletes(you spend 10mil on men’s athletics player salaries you have to spend 10 on women’s). I think it’s wild football will have to subsidize other sports even more but I don’t think your getting around title ix unless you break mbb and football away under the deal the podcast guy talks about. The title Ix lawsuits are already starting against nil collectives.
Why is it wild? It’s Federal legislation that has been in place for 50 years?
1 Like