The players association

[DAG 34,016]

UAB was first. When does Auburn join?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/40024327/uab-becomes-1st-d-football-team-join-players-association

[wareaglefan444 85]

14 minutes ago, DAG said:

UAB was first. When does Auburn join?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/40024327/uab-becomes-1st-d-football-team-join-players-association

how long will it be before the UAB football program folds again

[TexasTiger 13,006]

41 minutes ago, DAG said:

UAB was first. When does Auburn join?

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/40024327/uab-becomes-1st-d-football-team-join-players-association

He plays for a team that loses money:

Quarterback Jacob Zeno said the move shows the players' growing interest in having a voice in a new model for college sports.

"In a way, we've been cheated out of money, and decisions are being made behind our back," Zeno told ESPN. "It's not really fair because we do so much for the sport, for the school and the conference. We should at least deserve to know what's going on and what decisions are being made."

[DAG 34,016]

32 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

He plays for a team that loses money:

Quarterback Jacob Zeno said the move shows the players' growing interest in having a voice in a new model for college sports.

"In a way, we've been cheated out of money, and decisions are being made behind our back," Zeno told ESPN. "It's not really fair because we do so much for the sport, for the school and the conference. We should at least deserve to know what's going on and what decisions are being made."

True. It was only a matter of time though before the players started seeking revenue sharing. 

[TexasTiger 13,006]

2 hours ago, DAG said:

True. It was only a matter of time though before the players started seeking revenue sharing. 

And it makes sense, but I suspect it will come down to the haves and have nots— which schools have the lucrative media deals? Right now it’s the recently reduced Power 4. Very little for the group of 5. Zeno overestimates his worth at a school like UAB. If he shared their revenue he’d owe a ton of money.

[JerryAU 1,688]

9 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

And it makes sense, but I suspect it will come down to the haves and have nots— which schools have the lucrative media deals? Right not it’s the recently reduced Power 4. Very little for the group of 5. Zeno overestimates his worth at a school like UAB. If he shared their revenue he’d owe a ton of money.

Truth bomb!

Those UAB players feel cheated out of the revenue, but truth be told, very few programs operate in the black. 

[DAG 34,016]

31 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

And it makes sense, but I suspect it will come down to the haves and have nots— which schools have the lucrative media deals? Right not it’s the recently reduced Power 4. Very little for the group of 5. Zeno overestimates his worth at a school like UAB. If he shared their revenue he’d owe a ton of money.

I just wonder how this all will play out between revenue sharing (if this picks up steam), NIL. Hopefully they got the right people leading this charge. Being in the SEC, I imagine we would be in the haves group. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,167]

Interesting part of the story is how it seems like their head coach, Trent Dilfer, seemed to be a leading force in introducing the players and encouraging them to participate in this association. 

 

[JerryAU 1,688]

6 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Interesting part of the story is how it seems like their head coach, Trent Dilfer, seemed to be a leading force in introducing the players and encouraging them to participate in this association. 

 

There was a time not too long ago where 65% of UAB's athletic department revenue came from subsidies.  They had never been a self-sustaining operation up there.  Unless they've experienced and complete reversal of fortune once they joined the AAC, I doubt very much has changed in their revenue streams.  

[TexasTiger 13,006]

43 minutes ago, DAG said:

I just wonder how this all will play out between revenue sharing (if this picks up steam), NIL. Hopefully they got the right people leading this charge. Being in the SEC, I imagine we would be in the haves group. 

Absent some total collapse, I'm confident we'll be in the "haves," but I think how it plays out is pretty up in the air. Right now, the P4 schools have long-term TV contracts so I think any new configuration (e.g. a super league that ditches the NCAA) would require some significant renegotiations. But the current model seems unsustainable and the basic premises underlying big-time college sports have unalterably changed. It seems to me the future has to involve some type of employment contract for players to manage transfers, "salary caps," etc., and restore at least some measure of stability/predictability to rosters. What we've evolved to at present will exhaust coaches and those bankrolling programs. The fact is, it's pro ball now with less rules. the pro part ain't going away. There's gotta be a push toward more order, I would think.

I think the P4 schools, with maybe a handful of additions, leave the NCAA for at least football and form some type of association to manage it all.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

46 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Interesting part of the story is how it seems like their head coach, Trent Dilfer, seemed to be a leading force in introducing the players and encouraging them to participate in this association. 

 

I question his judgment and understanding of his funding model.

[Mikey 16,717]

Another step towards Who Gives a Crap.

[DAG 34,016]

15 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Absent some total collapse, I'm confident we'll be in the "haves," but I think how it plays out is pretty up in the air. Right now, the P4 schools have long-term TV contracts so I think any new configuration (e.g. a super league that ditches the NCAA) would require some significant renegotiations. But the current model seems unsustainable and the basic premises underlying big-time college sports have unalterably changed. It seems to me the future has to involve some type of employment contract for players to manage transfers, "salary caps," etc., and restore at least some measure of stability/predictability to rosters. What we've evolved to at present will exhaust coaches and those bankrolling programs. The fact is, it's pro ball now with less rules. the pro part ain't going away. There's gotta be a push toward more order, I would think.

I think the P4 schools, with maybe a handful of additions, leave the NCAA for at least football and form some type of association to manage it all.

I agree, it certainly does not seem sustainable. I honestly wish when Trevor Lawrence and Justin Fields bought this up years ago it would’ve been some sort of pathway for shared revenue . But it didn’t happen, now we got this. 

[aucom96 1,630]

22 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Absent some total collapse, I'm confident we'll be in the "haves," but I think how it plays out is pretty up in the air. Right now, the P4 schools have long-term TV contracts so I think any new configuration (e.g. a super league that ditches the NCAA) would require some significant renegotiations. But the current model seems unsustainable and the basic premises underlying big-time college sports have unalterably changed. It seems to me the future has to involve some type of employment contract for players to manage transfers, "salary caps," etc., and restore at least some measure of stability/predictability to rosters. What we've evolved to at present will exhaust coaches and those bankrolling programs. The fact is, it's pro ball now with less rules. the pro part ain't going away. There's gotta be a push toward more order, I would think.

I think the P4 schools, with maybe a handful of additions, leave the NCAA for at least football and form some type of association to manage it all.

Even if we are in the "haves", I suspect we'll be in the middle, at best, and with Texas and OU, maybe lower middle. It just being a question of booster money now, this entire thing only gets more tenuous with unions and seems much more dependent on inflated TV contracts which are probably going to wither as the effects of NIL take hold on the game itself. 

What is morbidly interesting to me is how much interest college football will continue to generate when the "haves" grow increasingly fixed in place and the "have nots" drop investment in the game altogether. 

[TexasTiger 13,006]

2 minutes ago, aucom96 said:

Even if we are in the "haves", I suspect we'll be in the middle, at best, and with Texas and OU, maybe lower middle. It just being a question of booster money now, this entire thing only gets more tenuous with unions and seems much more dependent on inflated TV contracts which are probably going to wither as the effects of NIL take hold on the game itself. 

What is morbidly interesting to me is how much interest college football will continue to generate when the "haves" grow increasingly fixed in place and the "have nots" drop investment in the game altogether. 

We need to put a competitive product on the field in the near future, but our history and schedule puts us in the top half, IMO. And I further suspect that if it comes to it, state legislatures will get involved to assure that current big state schools don't get left behind if one gets an invite and another doesn't.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,725]

For the guys that complain about NIL, this is the inevitable form of clarity needed. This is what leads to real regulation and professionalism (no pun intended) in this space

[Hank2020 3,216]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

And it makes sense, but I suspect it will come down to the haves and have nots— which schools have the lucrative media deals? Right now it’s the recently reduced Power 4. Very little for the group of 5. Zeno overestimates his worth at a school like UAB. If he shared their revenue he’d owe a ton of money.

As have-nots fold, tv money will go up for the haves. Positions /places for players will go down. Might still have non-NIL conferences though.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

5 minutes ago, Hank2020 said:

As have-nots fold, tv money will go up for the haves. Positions /places for players will go down. Might still have non-NIL conferences though.

I think the NIL will exist at lower levels, but at…a lower level, e.g. Local stores. NIL will exist at the highest level, too— just like the pros, but it won’t likely be the de facto paycheck from the school. Top players will get legitimate endorsement deals.

[Hank2020 3,216]

15 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

I think the NIL will exist at lower levels, but at…a lower level, e.g. Local stores. NIL will exist at the highest level, too— just like the pros, but it won’t likely be the de facto paycheck from the school. Top players will get legitimate endorsement deals.

Good premise.

[autigeremt 6,680]

College Athletics is semi-pro. May as well be ran like it. 

[AURex 2,031]

Not all college athletics.

1. Ivy League does not offer athletic scholarships, although they do have preferred admissions for athletes in some sports. They have proven sustainability.

2. Sorry to remind, but hey, there are many sports that are not football or basketball. For many schools, the Director's Cup / Olympic sports are of greater interest - not just in terms of school support, but also fan interest.

3. Auburn needs to field a beach volleyball team with buckets of NIL for the Livvy Dunne's of beach volleyball. This is sustainable! Home & Home vs UCLA, Miami, Hawaii, San Diego State, NW Florida Women's College ..... I suspect there would be universal fraternity support. NIL would obviously be determined by the Livvy Dunne factor, so recruiting becomes more important than athleticism or skill. Who cares if they win or lose. Who cares if they are on the Mediocrity List? It's all about the "form". And the athletes can certainly achieve their share of the revenue.

 

 

[TexasTiger 13,006]

54 minutes ago, AURex said:

Not all college athletics.

1. Ivy League does not offer athletic scholarships, although they do have preferred admissions for athletes in some sports. They have proven sustainability.

2. Sorry to remind, but hey, there are many sports that are not football or basketball. For many schools, the Director's Cup / Olympic sports are of greater interest - not just in terms of school support, but also fan interest.

3. Auburn needs to field a beach volleyball team with buckets of NIL for the Livvy Dunne's of beach volleyball. This is sustainable! Home & Home vs UCLA, Miami, Hawaii, San Diego State, NW Florida Women's College ..... I suspect there would be universal fraternity support. NIL would obviously be determined by the Livvy Dunne factor, so recruiting becomes more important than athleticism or skill. Who cares if they win or lose. Who cares if they are on the Mediocrity List? It's all about the "form". And the athletes can certainly achieve their share of the revenue.

 

 

The IVY League has much lower athletic expenses and huge endowments and donors that can absorb the cost of programs. For example, Harvard Stadium was built in 1903 and seats 25K. There's no big Athletic facilities arms race. They don't tap their alums for NIL or lose players in the portal (to the same degree, unless that rare grad transfer is looking for a different experience/pay day. Huge Ivy League endowments tend to provide sustainability across the board. And the rich always get richer-- more big donations all the time.

For the schools mostly interested in Olympic sports, that's great. Which ones do you have in mind? For schools fielding DI football teams, and to a lesser extent D1 basketball teams, the current model is not sustainable.

Beach volleyball? Why not.

[DAG 34,016]

 

Things are moving steadily.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40053021/college-sports-leaders-deep-talks-settle-nil-antitrust-case-vs-ncaa

 

The leaders of college sports are involved in "deep discussions" to reach a legal settlement that would likely lay out the framework for sharing revenue with athletes in a future NCAA business model, sources told ESPN.

Sources indicated the top-end revenue share number per school -- once it's determined -- would be in the neighborhood of $20 million annually, although that's yet to be settled. 

Edited April 30 by DAG

[TexasTiger 13,006]

13 minutes ago, DAG said:

 

Things are moving steadily.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40053021/college-sports-leaders-deep-talks-settle-nil-antitrust-case-vs-ncaa

 

The leaders of college sports are involved in "deep discussions" to reach a legal settlement that would likely lay out the framework for sharing revenue with athletes in a future NCAA business model, sources told ESPN.

Sources indicated the top-end revenue share number per school -- once it's determined -- would be in the neighborhood of $20 million annually, although that's yet to be settled. 

I wonder if a pay plan results in other changes, like fewer scholarship athletes? 53 instead of 85? When you’re having to split revenue you reconsider the relative value of the guys who don’t play much. Will colleges have practice squads that make significantly less? 

[DAG 34,016]

22 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

I wonder if a pay plan results in other changes, like fewer scholarship athletes? 53 instead of 85? When you’re having to split revenue you reconsider the relative value of the guys who don’t play much. Will colleges have practice squads that make significantly less? 

Good questions all around. So much grey area. I am also wondering where they are getting that estimate figure of 20 million.