Can we stay competitive in the NIL era?

[GoldZ]

The SEC/Big 10 are making a ton of money on their football teams – TV money, gate receipts, etc. They are plowing that money back into their football programs. I don’t understand why people are criticizing the NFL for this. Are they benefiting, absolutely, but that’s not by their doing. I guess you could argue that they have some skin in that they require people to be 3 years removed from high school before jumping to the NFL, but I also think the colleges preferred/agreed/negotiated that too when that rule was established.

I doubt CFB had much of a say to the NFL about anything, except the possibility of the 3 year thingy(and that is probably short-lived). Not many D-1 programs are swimming in money. Even the sec/B10 revenue is top heavy among 7-8 teams combined. However, the remaining members of their conferences, as well as many many poor cousins like Tech are necessary for the top teams to beat up on AND the NFL to have the necessary numbers to create the draft pool. Even a so called super conference won't satisfy the NFL's needs. CFB has been and still is the NFL's farm system at a tremendous expense on the part of colleges. MLB's farm expenses >>> than NFL's. The NBA is probably somewhere in between the two.

 

[Vespidae]

I don't understand generate 30% of NFL programming value. If the SEC/Big10 form a superleague, it won't be to share anything with the NFL. It will be to create even more money that they can keep and split among themselves. This isn't sharktank where they need the NFL(ie Shark) to invest into some new venture.

It's not about sharing. It's about value$ and whether or not the most powerful schools in college football can extract that value$. So the first question is ... how much value$ is worth pursuing? So let's use the NFL as a benchmark. It isn't the same, but we can compare. (This is what Greg Sankey talks about.)

The NFL's next media rights deal is worth $113 billion over 11 years, for an annual lifetime average of almost $10.3 billion. Assuming you could get 30% of what the NFL gets in media rights, that means 30 CFB teams will negotiate a deal worth $33B. That's $3.3B a year and 10X what the SEC is getting today. So if a super league can get the best match ups, get the most teams into the CFB Playoffs, and get ratings viewership to the bottom range of the NFL ... THEN they can sell the rights for 30% of what the NFL gets ... they will get 10X as much money as the SEC does today. (If they an get more than 30%, all the better.)

That's what all of this is ultimately about. Be one of the top, most desirable teams that people want to watch and the bucks will fall like manna from heaven.

 

[RamblinRed]

I think the idea of the eventual split in the NCAA will be for there to be multiple tiers.
The Tier 1 group will likely only play other tier 1 teams. Like the NFL. I'm not expecting Tier 1 teams to play tier 2 teams. That is not what I think will happen and this is also why I don't think it is about the SEC/B10 creating a super league. It will be some teams from each of the P5 making up that first tier. But the majority of teams from each conference will not be in tier 1.
Tier 2 will be its own group with its own championships. If there is a tier 3 probably the same.

In terms of college football fans keep thinking in terms of conferences. I'm not sure that is how it will play out, especially in Tier 1.

 

[Techster]

Time for unintended consequences...

 

[slugboy]

I think the idea of the eventual split in the NCAA will be for there to be multiple tiers.
The Tier 1 group will likely only play other tier 1 teams. Like the NFL. I'm not expecting Tier 1 teams to play tier 2 teams. That is not what I think will happen and this is also why I don't think it is about the SEC/B10 creating a super league. It will be some teams from each of the P5 making up that first tier. But the majority of teams from each conference will not be in tier 1.
Tier 2 will be its own group with its own championships. If there is a tier 3 probably the same.

In terms of college football fans keep thinking in terms of conferences. I'm not sure that is how it will play out, especially in Tier 1.

There’s no appetite for relegation here, but the European soccer leagues have tiers of play, and there’s some limited play between them, but it’s mostly in your tier. I just don’t see how to get to a system like that from here.

 

[Vespidae]

There’s no appetite for relegation here, but the European soccer leagues have tiers of play, and there’s some limited play between them, but it’s mostly in your tier. I just don’t see how to get to a system like that from here.

The EPL is a good league and a good model. But CFB has to worry about antitrust. Getting to a new model is going to be painful.

 

[g0lftime]

All the various scenerios don't include the effect on the other sports. The ACC is still a very strong BB and Baseball conference. Would FB be a different scheduling model for the "top tier" schools. Can one big super FB conference survive if it is forced to play all it's games among itself? How long will alums and businesses spend big bucks on NIL when there is really no return on their money except to feed their own ego.

 

[Vespidae]

All the various scenerios don't include the effect on the other sports. The ACC is still a very strong BB and Baseball conference. Would FB be a different scheduling model for the "top tier" schools. Can one big super FB conference survive if it is forced to play all it's games among itself? How long will alums and businesses spend big bucks on NIL when there is really no return on their money except to feed their own ego.

I don't think it's going to be one conference playing only itself. It's probably an "open conference" where any one can apply and be included if it meets certain requirements. So, Alabama will still play for the SEC championship and then have X number of Super League Games on top of that.

The biggest problem facing college football is anti-trust. They are going to have to make any Super League opt in and not exclude out. Otherwise, it's lawsuit city.

 

[slugboy]

All the various scenerios don't include the effect on the other sports. The ACC is still a very strong BB and Baseball conference. Would FB be a different scheduling model for the "top tier" schools. Can one big super FB conference survive if it is forced to play all it's games among itself? How long will alums and businesses spend big bucks on NIL when there is really no return on their money except to feed their own ego.

"Bagmen" have been doing that in the shadows for at least 50 years, if not 100. The difference now is that it's bigger bags.

On one hand, I can't see it lasting as-is. On the other hand, a couple of years ago I heard an interview with someone renting a skybox at the SuperBowl--they'd pulled $30-35k from their business, took some friends, and wouldn't give their name because they didn't want their wife to find out about the money. So, on that "other hand" there's an amazing amount of dark money that people will drop on sports.

 

[Richard7125]

I think the idea of the eventual split in the NCAA will be for there to be multiple tiers.
The Tier 1 group will likely only play other tier 1 teams. Like the NFL. I'm not expecting Tier 1 teams to play tier 2 teams. That is not what I think will happen and this is also why I don't think it is about the SEC/B10 creating a super league. It will be some teams from each of the P5 making up that first tier. But the majority of teams from each conference will not be in tier 1.
Tier 2 will be its own group with its own championships. If there is a tier 3 probably the same.

In terms of college football fans keep thinking in terms of conferences. I'm not sure that is how it will play out, especially in Tier 1.

I find it hard to believe that the Tier 1 will only play Tier 1. The SEC is the big dog here and they have remained steadfast on keeping an 8 game conference schedule so they could continue to play several Little Sisters of the Poor each year.

 

[GoldZ]

I find it hard to believe that the Tier 1 will only play Tier 1. The SEC is the big dog here and they have remained steadfast on keeping an 8 game conference schedule so they could continue to play several Little Sisters of the Poor each year.

The bottom third of the sec is comparatively sisters of the poor already, same for Big. Even worse for ACC and others.

 

[RamblinRed]

I know it seems unfathomable, and it might be, but if you are going to have a super league and TV is paying for it, TV is going to want super league games, not games against teams outside of it.
Geno Smith talked about college football being run completely separate from the other sports. So football would be its own thing and then the other sports would still likely have a conference setup.

If they truly decide to break I don't see the super league teams playing full conference schedules. They may play a game or two outside of the super league but otherwise their games come against other super league. I would also expect a different post-season structure. There wouldn't be the current CFP like it is now. I would expect it to be more like NFL playoffs where 50% of the league makes the playoff. So playing all your games against other super league teams doesn't hurt you - unless you are one of the weaker members of that league.

 

[RamblinRed]

I've stated in the past that GT is so different than when I went to school. I've been putting together statistics on the 69 schools that will be in the P5 conferences in 2024 (I am including ND in this). Things like undergraduate and graduate enrollment, endowment size, win totals in football the last 3 and 4 years.

I didn't realize until now how much GT had turned into a graduate school, compared to when I went there. They have now almost as many doctoral students at GT as they had post grad students when I attended. Even though our undergraduate size has almost doubled since I was in school, it is still one of the smallest P5 schools in terms of undergraduate population. Maybe more interesting, it has more graduate students than undergraduate students (by a pretty significant amount). Only 3 P5 schools had larger graduate populations that GT - USC, Ariz St and Ill.

GT had a PR last fall where it said it had 26,398 grad students. That included 3,635 PhD students, 7,210 who are taking classes in Atlanta and 17,863 online (where GT had made a huge presence).

GT was one of only 5 P5 schools to have more graduate students than undergraduate students (USC, Northwestern, Duke, and Stanford were the other 4). A few other schools had pretty evenly split numbers - that included Vandy, Wake, BC, Miami and Notre Dame.

So comparing to the 69 total schools I got the numbers for here is where GT resided.

Undergraduate enrollment size - 58th (9th in ACC)
Graduate enrollment size - 4th (1st in ACC)
Endowment per undergrad student - 22nd ( 8th in the ACC incl ND, 7th if you excl ND)

In many ways (including demographics) GT looks more like a private school now than a public one.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Endowment per undergrad student - 22nd ( 8th in the ACC incl ND, 7th if you excl ND)

I am assuming this endowment is academic and not athletic?

 

[Roswellgoldmember]

I've stated in the past that GT is so different than when I went to school. I've been putting together statistics on the 69 schools that will be in the P5 conferences in 2024 (I am including ND in this). Things like undergraduate and graduate enrollment, endowment size, win totals in football the last 3 and 4 years.

I didn't realize until now how much GT had turned into a graduate school, compared to when I went there. They have now almost as many doctoral students at GT as they had post grad students when I attended. Even though our undergraduate size has almost doubled since I was in school, it is still one of the smallest P5 schools in terms of undergraduate population. Maybe more interesting, it has more graduate students than undergraduate students (by a pretty significant amount). Only 3 P5 schools had larger graduate populations that GT - USC, Ariz St and Ill.

GT had a PR last fall where it said it had 26,398 grad students. That included 3,635 PhD students, 7,210 who are taking classes in Atlanta and 17,863 online (where GT had made a huge presence).

GT was one of only 5 P5 schools to have more graduate students than undergraduate students (USC, Northwestern, Duke, and Stanford were the other 4). A few other schools had pretty evenly split numbers - that included Vandy, Wake, BC, Miami and Notre Dame.

So comparing to the 69 total schools I got the numbers for here is where GT resided.

Undergraduate enrollment size - 58th (9th in ACC)
Graduate enrollment size - 4th (1st in ACC)
Endowment per undergrad student - 22nd ( 8th in the ACC incl ND, 7th if you excl ND)

In many ways (including demographics) GT looks more like a private school now than a public one.

I think those graduate numbers are skewed by GT's massive online MS in Computer Science program. If you want to count that fine but it's where most of the growth has come from and don't think that it has any relevance to on campus sports.

 

[mkemkay]

Thanks. It honestly seemed like a rhetorical question with a lot of debate following it

I'll admit that I asked the original question knowing full well the answer. But I deeply appreciate how the conversation had a lot of folks get around the change curve. I think a lot of us have been postulating that the right coach/ more investment from our rich alums would re-energize the program. In my opinion, the body of work done by posters in this thread makes it clear we are not just behind, but we are structurally unsound for the pursuit of the top tier teams.

 

[MusicalBuzz]

I’m just trying to process the new Fans’ Rules of Engagement regarding players:

Are we now allowed to criticize them by name because they‘re now said to be Professionals? Or does open season apply only to those who get NIL money (on top of the 6-figures of freebies they were already receiving)?

Or are they still just kids?

 

[RamblinRed]

I am assuming this endowment is academic and not athletic?

Correct.

 

[RamblinRed]

I think those graduate numbers are skewed by GT's massive online MS in Computer Science program. If you want to count that fine but it's where most of the growth has come from and don't think that it has any relevance to on campus sports.

This is absolutely correct, but it also shows how GT is working toward the future. Graduate students in general are not going to be big supporters of an athletic program and online ones even less so.
GT is likely generating alot of revenue for the school (by that I mean the academic side) and greatly increasing its alumni base with its online programs and its relatively large grad programs in genreal, but it is doing so in a way that will not benefit its athletic programs. From an athletic programs standpoint GT is still a relatively small (bottom quintile) undergraduate school.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

I'll admit that I asked the original question knowing full well the answer. But I deeply appreciate how the conversation had a lot of folks get around the change curve. I think a lot of us have been postulating that the right coach/ more investment from our rich alums would re-energize the program. In my opinion, the body of work done by posters in this thread makes it clear we are not just behind, but we are structurally unsound for the pursuit of the top tier teams.

You are correct. We are structurally unsound as is. The successful programs are backed by the academic side, the school President, their state board of regents, usually the Governor, the alum, sidewalk fans, and the local media. Of those GT has half of one - the sports minded alum. We are right where our academic side, our school president, the board of regents, and the local media wants us to be - wandering from coach to coach decade after decade and not raising any issues for the real program in our state.