The End of College Football

HawkGA

New member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
107,412
Reaction score
1
I don't have much of a problem with it. Better than schools and companies making money and leaving the players out in the cold.

That said, I would think some sort of distribution system is needed. The QB's face will make a lot of money but not the RG. Yet if the RG doesn't do his job, the QB's face is going to be flattened. I think I would prefer some sort of system where the money goes into a pot and all athletes get paid (well, at least for that sport). Kind of like how bowl money is shared in a conference.
 
OP
OP
D

DomeHawk

Guest
HawkGA":2vfx4l6s said:
I don't have much of a problem with it. Better than schools and companies making money and leaving the players out in the cold.

That said, I would think some sort of distribution system is needed. The QB's face will make a lot of money but not the RG. Yet if the RG doesn't do his job, the QB's face is going to be flattened. I think I would prefer some sort of system where the money goes into a pot and all athletes get paid (well, at least for that sport). Kind of like how bowl money is shared in a conference.

^^^^That is what I was getting at.
 
OP
OP
D

DomeHawk

Guest
HawkGA":jkk1dko3 said:
I don't have much of a problem with it. Better than schools and companies making money and leaving the players out in the cold.

That said, I would think some sort of distribution system is needed. The QB's face will make a lot of money but not the RG. Yet if the RG doesn't do his job, the QB's face is going to be flattened. I think I would prefer some sort of system where the money goes into a pot and all athletes get paid (well, at least for that sport). Kind of like how bowl money is shared in a conference.

But start to look at the implications of this. Phil Knight, i.e., Nike, supports Oregon so now Nike pays substantial high paying sponsorship's to Oregon players? Guess where the 5-star athlete wants to go.

It's an absolute mess just waiting to happen.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,519
Reaction score
1,520
Location
Roy Wa.
Or they create a cap for each program and even the NCAA playing field and kids go where the education is or Coaching is depending on circumstances. Better Coach means better endorsements and advertisements for the programs while still having a scholarship limit.

It's a can of worms that breeds corruption and now hidden money in many ways. Not that the current system doesn't anyway, at least the kids my get something for themselves since only about 1 percent make it to the NFL and may get a chance for a couple seasons at best.
 

Milehighhawk

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
928
Reaction score
23
The competitive landscape of CFB died years ago in my opinion. This is just another blip on the money train it has already become.
 

sdog1981

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,367
Reaction score
240
This is not the end of college football.

States passing laws limiting contact in practice of highschool football and insurance companies not writing policies for schools that play tackle football are more concerning.
 

HawkGA

New member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
107,412
Reaction score
1
DomeHawk":2v9doofz said:
HawkGA":2v9doofz said:
I don't have much of a problem with it. Better than schools and companies making money and leaving the players out in the cold.

That said, I would think some sort of distribution system is needed. The QB's face will make a lot of money but not the RG. Yet if the RG doesn't do his job, the QB's face is going to be flattened. I think I would prefer some sort of system where the money goes into a pot and all athletes get paid (well, at least for that sport). Kind of like how bowl money is shared in a conference.

But start to look at the implications of this. Phil Knight, i.e., Nike, supports Oregon so now Nike pays substantial high paying sponsorship's to Oregon players? Guess where the 5-star athlete wants to go.

It's an absolute mess just waiting to happen.

Oh, so you mean you are worried it is the end of Huskies' football.

I'm actually less worried about the cross team differences than I am the inner team treatment of players.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,519
Reaction score
1,520
Location
Roy Wa.
HawkGA":28rp9b1f said:
DomeHawk":28rp9b1f said:
HawkGA":28rp9b1f said:
I don't have much of a problem with it. Better than schools and companies making money and leaving the players out in the cold.

That said, I would think some sort of distribution system is needed. The QB's face will make a lot of money but not the RG. Yet if the RG doesn't do his job, the QB's face is going to be flattened. I think I would prefer some sort of system where the money goes into a pot and all athletes get paid (well, at least for that sport). Kind of like how bowl money is shared in a conference.

But start to look at the implications of this. Phil Knight, i.e., Nike, supports Oregon so now Nike pays substantial high paying sponsorship's to Oregon players? Guess where the 5-star athlete wants to go.

It's an absolute mess just waiting to happen.

Oh, so you mean you are worried it is the end of Huskies' football.

I'm actually less worried about the cross team differences than I am the inner team treatment of players.

UW may benefit from this, I am sure that Billy Joe Hobart is thinking that damn about 25 years or so too late.
 

Uncle Si

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
20,596
Reaction score
3
Can someone clarify:

This allows players to profit from their brand, correct? They can get money from sponsors, not donations or payouts? And the school can not promote or direct these business relations, nor profit from them?

As dangerous as this is, if this is what it is, college football paved the way for this through the exploitation of their athletes for gross monetary gain.

The only right thing here is for the schools to step in and pay these athletes a salary.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,519
Reaction score
1,520
Location
Roy Wa.
Uncle Si":3qs4uzbb said:
Can someone clarify:

This allows players to profit from their brand, correct? They can get money from sponsors, not donations or payouts? And the school can not promote or direct these business relations, nor profit from them?

As dangerous as this is, if this is what it is, college football paved the way for this through the exploitation of their athletes for gross monetary gain.

The only right thing here is for the schools to step in and pay these athletes a salary.


This is going to be messy, anything that an athlete gets he has to do without a Schools logo or affiliation, that could be tough, if he has a logo or some affiliation in his likeness being distributed then the school will want a portion, it's not like some of these guys are recognized on the street like say Brady or Manning's yet. I use QB's because obviously they have the most to profit from this.
 

knownone

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
5,272
Reaction score
2,207
In the last 20 to 30 years, colleges have become more and more reliant on the business exploiting their students. So, i'm wondering if this could trickle down into other aspects of what is or is not deemed legally acceptable by these institutions.
 

dutchcoug

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
610
Reaction score
11
UW has been paying players since the late 80’s, who cares?
 

SantaClaraHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
15,007
Reaction score
3,088
I see this as potentially not that big a deal.

So the most famous players can get a shoe deal, maybe more but not most can have an etsy market that deliberately cannot feature their school, just as it is in nfl. I remember Sherm and Beast both having their stores and merch, but the most they could do there was replicate team colors or maybe a still. I expect the NCAA to go even harder than NFL on anything whiffing of copyright infringement with the net result being that the players either a) sign their rights away for say 20 percent tops or b) pay for the marketing themselves with their schools taking at least 50 percent.

I mean, the latest sounds like it's best for player equity, but in fact no one wants to upset the apple cart. Sherm for instance rails against this, but fact is he got an education worth hundreds of thousands of dollars (at a school that actually insists athletes be educated) tax-free. Same with Christian McCaffrey. There will be fewer offers if colleges feel they will profit less.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,519
Reaction score
1,520
Location
Roy Wa.
SantaClaraHawk":2h8umtf1 said:
I see this as potentially not that big a deal.

So the most famous players can get a shoe deal, maybe more but not most can have an etsy market that deliberately cannot feature their school, just as it is in nfl. I remember Sherm and Beast both having their stores and merch, but the most they could do there was replicate team colors or maybe a still. I expect the NCAA to go even harder than NFL on anything whiffing of copyright infringement with the net result being that the players either a) sign their rights away for say 20 percent tops or b) pay for the marketing themselves with their schools taking at least 50 percent.

I mean, the latest sounds like it's best for player equity, but in fact no one wants to upset the apple cart. Sherm for instance rails against this, but fact is he got an education worth hundreds of thousands of dollars (at a school that actually insists athletes be educated) tax-free. Same with Christian McCaffrey. There will be fewer offers if colleges feel they will profit less.

This opens up the ability for players to get into local business advertisements, take Wagner on the Seahawks for the Plumbing company as a example, College guys could do something like this as well, of course they would have to find the time. But take a QB and or a WR, possibly a defensive standout that has name recognition and get a commercial and ads. This would also mean they would have to be allowed to have Agents as well that could jockey and market them. It gets bigger and bigger the more you really think about it as more people will want a piece of that money aspect along with a ton more rules.
 

SantaClaraHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
15,007
Reaction score
3,088
Having grown up in a college town, I think the market could be huge if we're strictly talking football.

Everyone within 20 miles of Stanford, maybe more, knew who McCaffrey was. We all saw his tape on local news. And the default for residents of the Peninsula/South Bay (the space between SF and San Jose) is to like Stanford.

I can think of seven car dealerships in that radius who would have signed local deals or especially those local cable deals where you just get snuck in whenever there was 15 seconds. Big money even locally. Since we're increasingly non local, I agree with you that the pie and fingers in it will hugely expand beyond the average 20-yo's capability of understanding.
 

Uncle Si

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
20,596
Reaction score
3
SantaClaraHawk":3dmqxgt2 said:
Having grown up in a college town, I think the market could be huge if we're strictly talking football.

Everyone within 20 miles of Stanford, maybe more, knew who McCaffrey was. We all saw his tape on local news. And the default for residents of the Peninsula/South Bay (the space between SF and San Jose) is to like Stanford.

I can think of seven car dealerships in that radius who would have signed local deals or especially those local cable deals where you just get snuck in whenever there was 15 seconds. Big money even locally. Since we're increasingly non local, I agree with you that the pie and fingers in it will hugely expand beyond the average 20-yo's capability of understanding.

I disagree here, and I think this may be why its happening.

I think we will see a small, major market for heisman level talent, and then a significant drop for anyone else. I don't think the marketability will be worth the investment.

Dome's issue with Oregon and Nike is where I see this getting really muddy. Recruits being offered marketing opportunities from major businesses who support the university.

Whether that's the "end" of college sports, who knows. College sports is effectively over, and has been, as an amatuer sports entity for decades now. It's just a matter of whether fans want to continue the exploitation of young athletes for their entertainment while a select few get horribly wealthy from it, or allow those exploited athletes to gain from it.

But as an entity, major college sports is kind of gross. You want it to be healthy and endearing, look at some of the lesser sports. I played D1 soccer and never saw anything like what we read about it. Dated a volleyball player, who was friends with girls from the basketball team, same thing. There just wasn't a commercial interest in our sports, so no (or very minimal, base level recruiting stuff) rule breaking
 

CPHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
4,853
Reaction score
921
dutchcoug":3je6g0m2 said:
UW has been paying players since the late 80’s, who cares?


I don't think Billy Joe was sharing his money with teammates. The only difference is now it will be legal.
 
OP
OP
D

DomeHawk

Guest
dutchcoug":193pty4m said:
UW has been paying players since the late 80’s, who cares?

Yeah, but they are paying them with fruit.
 
OP
OP
D

DomeHawk

Guest
CPHawk":3fjcuxrb said:
dutchcoug":3fjcuxrb said:
UW has been paying players since the late 80’s, who cares?


I don't think Billy Joe was sharing his money with teammates. The only difference is now it will be legal.

To clarify ad-nauseam: Billy Joe Hobert had NOTHING to do with the NCAA's sanctions on UW. His loans were not illegal but they did get the interest of the L.A. Times who were out to get UW along with the rest of the Pac conference who were simply fed up with UW's winning. The sanctions were the result of fruit baskets and construction jobs in L.A. that Husky alumni gave to L.A. Husky players in summer, something that every major program in America could have been accused of. The sanctions were WAY out of proportion to the (supposed) violations, and NO UW coach or anyone associated with the program was ever accused of having knowledge of any of the violations.

Read it: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/580 ... ncaas-hand
 
Top