Jump to content

Discussion to leave the NCAA


GunsmithAU

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, GunsmithAU said:

Kids already make that choice in baseball getting to he drafted out of HS. And their option to go pro is absolute garbage. They get paid literally nothing, and have to take on out of season jobs to survive. A CFB draft option would pay more and provide better opportunities down the road. 

There is no reason why a draft and paid option vs a recruit and school option wouldn't be viable. 

This is the reason why there’s no valid solution other than an NFL-run under 20 development league. Every other pro league on earth has it. Oil and water don’t mix. There are professional athletes and student athletes. A professional student athlete will not work. 

When you choose a school, you’re supposed to be making a decision on how to best equip yourself to pursue a lifelong career path. It’s incompatible with making a decision to take a short term job for money.

People can’t have their cake and eat it too, here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





14 hours ago, GunsmithAU said:

The only interns I knew were short term grads. They were not paid, but usually only worked a few months before it led to a job. 

 

Interesting though. 

To my knowledge Camp War Eagle counselors and tour leaders don’t get paid. Recruiting hosts and hostesses don’t get paid. Lots of student jobs that benefit the university don’t get paid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CT Tiger said:

You absolutely raise valid points. Yes, that revenue goes to the school's athletic department and is vital in subsidizing other sports. And yes, a 3rd string WR almost definitely moves the needle less compared to a star player.

But I don't think those aren't things that can be addressed in the creation of a strong framework, uniform across the board for FBS teams. Look, I'm not saying that schools should be paying players 7 figures per season; but just off the top of my head, what about having a five-tier structure that's reevaluated before each season?

(Note: The numbers are just hypothetical for this next part and those specifics should be decided after rigorous analysis to determine appropriate dollar amounts.)

Something like $100,000 for tier 1 players, $50,000 for tier 2, $25,000 for tier 3, the usual full scholarship for tier 4, and tier 5 would be walk-ons without an athletic scholarship. Tiers 1-3 also include a full athletic scholarship. Each school will be allowed the same limited number of tier 1, 2, and 3 "paid" scholarships. (These would effectively be salary caps for teams to ensure that a school with stupidly deep pockets like Texas can't just buy all of the top recruits. Every school would probably offer a 5* recruit tier 1 status, but things could be interesting for the 4* and top 3* recruits. Say there's a promising in-state OL that the gumps and us are chasing hard. They can only offer tier 2 while we still have enough tier 1's and are in serious need of good OL recruits. 

Throw in some reforms to reasonably limit misuse of the transfer portal. Maybe allow one freebie but any after that require either sitting out a season like the old rule? Or maybe one freebie and any transfers afterwards would disqualify them from tier 1-3 for one season. That way they can still play ball without impacting their NFL aspirations. 

NIL would also need to have strong, but fair and LEGAL regulations that can be easily reconciled with any proposed player payment structure to ensure that we see uniform "salary caps" across the board for CFB at the highest level. 

 

I just came up with this idea on a whim while sitting on the throne after a morning coffee, so I'm sure there are plenty of holes that can be poked in it, and I hope that people will (respectfully, of course). I just want to see if those holes can be patched up to strengthen it. 

 

 

I think there could be a money system devised to work with some arbitrators involved. But the question I continue to raise that nobody will answer is this - even if we get all the money to work, there’s no scenario where it won’t result in the end of 90% of the other competitive sports at the college level. So are you okay with Auburn only fielding a football and men’s basketball team, is my question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, AUght2win said:

To my knowledge Camp War Eagle counselors and tour leaders don’t get paid. Recruiting hosts and hostesses don’t get paid. Lots of student jobs that benefit the university don’t get paid.

CWE and tour people aren't in the AD. The recruiting hosts and hostesses I knew were paid, but i only knew them as upperclassmen. They very well could have not been paid in the 1st year or 2 or dependant on the individual and year. 

Edited by GunsmithAU
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, AUght2win said:

This is the reason why there’s no valid solution other than an NFL-run under 20 development league. Every other pro league on earth has it. Oil and water don’t mix. There are professional athletes and student athletes. A professional student athlete will not work. 

When you choose a school, you’re supposed to be making a decision on how to best equip yourself to pursue a lifelong career path. It’s incompatible with making a decision to take a short term job for money.

People can’t have their cake and eat it too, here.

There is literally no difference between a baseball kid choosing college or pro as in my solution. Both are accepted and viable. I'm a draft CFB case though, the pay would be much better. Players treated better. 

Yea a short term job thats no different than a player going semi pro or farm league for the pro sports. Even with players in school many many opt out of their final years.  It's already something kids do. Even giving up the remainder of their scholarship and choosing ball over a degree. 

If there was a NFL development league the same would happen. Some go to college some go to the developmental league. But just like in baseball, the pro development league will pay less and be worse for the athletes than a school based paid system. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, AUght2win said:

I think there could be a money system devised to work with some arbitrators involved. But the question I continue to raise that nobody will answer is this - even if we get all the money to work, there’s no scenario where it won’t result in the end of 90% of the other competitive sports at the college level. So are you okay with Auburn only fielding a football and men’s basketball team, is my question. 

To be clear, you're suggesting that revenue sharing with football players will kill the budget for most other sports? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, AUght2win said:

I think there could be a money system devised to work with some arbitrators involved. But the question I continue to raise that nobody will answer is this - even if we get all the money to work, there’s no scenario where it won’t result in the end of 90% of the other competitive sports at the college level. So are you okay with Auburn only fielding a football and men’s basketball team, is my question. 

When you say arbitrators what do you mean by that? 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Didba said:

When you say arbitrators what do you mean by that? 

Same as MLB arbitration. Players name a figure they think they are worth. NCAA/Colleges name a figure THEY think the player is worth. Neutral arbitrators hear both sides and decide what the player should be paid.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CT Tiger said:

To be clear, you're suggesting that revenue sharing with football players will kill the budget for most other sports? 

It’s not a suggestion. It would 100% happen. Auburn makes a killing from football, and even with that, still barely breaks even. Most schools lose a bit of money every year.

If football revenue stays strictly with football staff, operations, and players then college sports will cease to exist overnight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, GunsmithAU said:

There is literally no difference between a baseball kid choosing college or pro as in my solution. Both are accepted and viable. I'm a draft CFB case though, the pay would be much better. Players treated better. 

Yea a short term job thats no different than a player going semi pro or farm league for the pro sports. Even with players in school many many opt out of their final years.  It's already something kids do. Even giving up the remainder of their scholarship and choosing ball over a degree. 

If there was a NFL development league the same would happen. Some go to college some go to the developmental league. But just like in baseball, the pro development league will pay less and be worse for the athletes than a school based paid system. 

 

 

I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. In baseball, HS prospects can choose between the offers the pros make (which are substantial to early round picks) or they can pick a college to play for - that choice in school is key.

They are required to study for a degree and go to class. Currently, kids have the freedom to go to a school that offers the major and programs they want. That wouldn’t be possible with a college draft.

You CANNOT mix pro sports and school sports. You can’t force a kid to go study for a degree he doesn’t want. 

There needs to be an NFL development league. Nothing else makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

It’s not a suggestion. It would 100% happen. Auburn makes a killing from football, and even with that, still barely breaks even. Most schools lose a bit of money every year.

If football revenue stays strictly with football staff, operations, and players then college sports will cease to exist overnight.

 

Again, the total amount spent by the Athletic department on my hypothetical proposal would depend on specifics (e.g., total number of scholarships available in each tier and the actual amount of the 'stipend' that comes with tier 1-3 scholarships). Let's say the breakdown is 10 tier 1 scholarships ($100k/ea), 20 tier 2 ($50k/ ea) 30 tier 3 ($25k/ ea) and the rest of the scholarships do not include the stipend. That comes out to $2,750,000 total each year. 

Now let's take a look at Auburn's AD financial profit/losses over the past 15 years. Keep in mind this is for all sports, not just football so subsidizing the others are included in the figures. I have highlighted years when this would be an issue. Even then, profit reserves accumulated from previous years (when subtracting by $2,750,000 for player stipends) would easily cover these. Yes, the deficits for the 2013-2014 and 2020-2021 COVID seasons are brutal, but they can be covered. 

 

2020-21 $123,546,999 $133,289,885 $(9,742,886)
2019-20 $153,703,749 $135,816,431 $17,887,318
2018-19 $152,455,416 $139,260,711 $13,194,705
2017-18 $147,620,569 $139,798,191 $7,822,378
2016-17 $147,511,034 $132,885,979 $14,625,055
2015-16 $140,070,593 $124,864,399 $15,206,194
2014-15 $124,657,247 $115,498,047 $9,159,200
2013-14 $113,716,004 $127,340,380 $(13,624,376)
2012-13 $103,680,609 $104,546,603 $(865,994)
2011-12 $105,951,253 $97,128,835 $8,822,418
2010-11 $103,982,441 $100,497,784 $3,484,657
2009-10 $92,611,558 $90,908,902 $1,702,656
2008-09 $87,001,413 $85,480,343 $1,521,070
2007-08 $89,311,824 $69,841,200 $19,470,624
2006-07 $81,799,266 $68,910,465 $12,888,801
2005-06 $66,599,925 $63,249,119 $3,350,806

 

https://www.al.com/auburnfootball/2022/01/auburn-athletics-reports-97-million-loss-in-2021.html

 

With that said, your point stands because most universities do not have the luxury of having a cash cow football program like we do. My hypothetical model would make more sense if/when these conference expansions are complete and the big boys start their own league/division. Those schools can make it work, especially since they will essentially be the amateur NFL league anyway.

 

Thoughts?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CT Tiger said:

 

Again, the total amount spent by the Athletic department on my hypothetical proposal would depend on specifics (e.g., total number of scholarships available in each tier and the actual amount of the 'stipend' that comes with tier 1-3 scholarships). Let's say the breakdown is 10 tier 1 scholarships ($100k/ea), 20 tier 2 ($50k/ ea) 30 tier 3 ($25k/ ea) and the rest of the scholarships do not include the stipend. That comes out to $2,750,000 total each year. 

Now let's take a look at Auburn's AD financial profit/losses over the past 15 years. Keep in mind this is for all sports, not just football so subsidizing the others are included in the figures. I have highlighted years when this would be an issue. Even then, profit reserves accumulated from previous years (when subtracting by $2,750,000 for player stipends) would easily cover these. Yes, the deficits for the 2013-2014 and 2020-2021 COVID seasons are brutal, but they can be covered. 

 

2020-21 $123,546,999 $133,289,885 $(9,742,886)
2019-20 $153,703,749 $135,816,431 $17,887,318
2018-19 $152,455,416 $139,260,711 $13,194,705
2017-18 $147,620,569 $139,798,191 $7,822,378
2016-17 $147,511,034 $132,885,979 $14,625,055
2015-16 $140,070,593 $124,864,399 $15,206,194
2014-15 $124,657,247 $115,498,047 $9,159,200
2013-14 $113,716,004 $127,340,380 $(13,624,376)
2012-13 $103,680,609 $104,546,603 $(865,994)
2011-12 $105,951,253 $97,128,835 $8,822,418
2010-11 $103,982,441 $100,497,784 $3,484,657
2009-10 $92,611,558 $90,908,902 $1,702,656
2008-09 $87,001,413 $85,480,343 $1,521,070
2007-08 $89,311,824 $69,841,200 $19,470,624
2006-07 $81,799,266 $68,910,465 $12,888,801
2005-06 $66,599,925 $63,249,119 $3,350,806

 

https://www.al.com/auburnfootball/2022/01/auburn-athletics-reports-97-million-loss-in-2021.html

 

With that said, your point stands because most universities do not have the luxury of having a cash cow football program like we do. My hypothetical model would make more sense if/when these conference expansions are complete and the big boys start their own league/division. Those schools can make it work, especially since they will essentially be the amateur NFL league anyway.

 

Thoughts?

If people would accept a set number like your 2.7 million a year it might work. The problem is that’s not going to satisfy people at all. 

The narrative is to give football players a piece of what they generate. We see in 2019 football generated 30 million just in ticket sales. Each SEC school also gets around 70 million per year from TV deals, which is of course mostly driven by CFB. So that’s $100 million right there without even counting merchandise and lesser known money makers. 

But let’s stick with $100 million as a basic number for how much football generates. The players only getting 2% of that isn’t going to fly. I don’t know the exact number people will be satisfied with, but if the idea is to “give the kids a piece of what they generate”, it’s going to be a big percentage of that 100 million. Maybe between 30-60%?

And that would effectively be what shuts down the other sports.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...