College football is a mess

57jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,462
Wow! What a thread.
My thoughts: Times change, Motives don't, Win at all "legal" costs. Define legal. Who does that?
 

L41k18

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
177
stinger78 said:
The product on the field is very good these days. That follows advances in nutrition, S&C, and coaching, all beginning at the HS level. Yes, money has purchased part of that, but not all of it. Many of those players who end up coaching are ones who didn't make it to the NFL. Coaching at the HS level is much better today overall than it was back in 1974. I'm not sure college coaching is as much, but probably somewhat. That is due to more former players at high levels entering the coaching field - an unintended consequence. I don't think many want to go back to 1974 for the CFB game itself.

Where the greatest effect of today's money is felt, IMO, is in the absurd escalation of coaches' salaries, constantly upgraded state of the art locker rooms and other facilities designed to catch recruits' eyes, expensive means of travel - such as helicopters, significant expansion of staffs, the rampant cost of "education," and now NIL. None of that, except staff expansion, really improves the game on the field but it sure explodes the cost. It's ludicrous that a college football coach makes over 10x what the President of the US makes, or research scientists seeking cures to disease. Yet, that's where we are. You may love it... I don't. It's not helping the game at all, IMO.

Few oppose the right of an athlete to market himself. No issue there at all. But that is not what all the money is about, and it is flowing so freely - like a narcotic - into the game today that the game is now hooked on money. Yes, it has always taken money to pay the bills. That is no different today than 1974, or 1954. But the money it requires now to run a "successful" program is decadent, again, in my opinion. There's a huge magnitude of difference in what we see today in AA budgets and what it took to run the non-profit AA back in 1974.

Just my opinion. You surely do not have to agree.
Click to expand...

I tried to find something in your post to disagree with.
I could not. 👍
 

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,894
Root4GT said:
College Football is Capitalism at it's worst. Market forces drive the cost of goods but much of the revenue comes from rich boosters who artificially inflate the cost of theos goods. The "boosters' role also is a barrier to true competition.

Determining worth or individual income is basically what the market is willing to bear. In current society athletes, actors and musicians at the highest levels make astronomical amounts of money. Basically that is a values statements on our society. It does seem ridiculous but it is reality.

Hard to imagine how sanity returns to College Football.
Click to expand...
The Ivy League figured it out a long time ago and what they have isn't perfect but does keep the role of athletics in universities more in perspective.
 

gtbb

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
57
alagold said:
That is probably where Tech is headed.We will be a school with athletics-not just at the highest level.Thus we can play teams at our level--hello Vandy,etc
Click to expand...
We'll have to see how far down into the ACC the defections go. Let's assume that FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami are gone to the P2. That still leaves 13 programs in the ACC, including programs like NC State, VT, UVA, Louisville, Pitt, etc. There's still a good schedule to be played at a high enough level to be of interest.

If the SEC & B1G plus the ACC defections form a break-away, we'll still have the ACC and the Big 12. And the breakway P2 will still play games against our conferences. Maybe we play for a championship at a level that's different than the P2. I don't know. Regardless, we'll still be playing football. I don't think we go all the to an Ivy league model.
 
stinger78

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,160
gtbb said:
We'll have to see how far down into the ACC the defections go. Let's assume that FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami are gone to the P2. That still leaves 13 programs in the ACC, including programs like NC State, VT, UVA, Louisville, Pitt, etc. There's still a good schedule to be played at a high enough level to be of interest.

If the SEC & B1G plus the ACC defections form a break-away, we'll still have the ACC and the Big 12. And the breakway P2 will still play games against our conferences. Maybe we play for a championship at a level that's different than the P2. I don't know. Regardless, we'll still be playing football. I don't think we go all the to an Ivy league model.
Click to expand...
The day UNC leaves the conference that the Triangle built will be the day before the conference dies.
 
leatherneckjacket

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,076
Location
Atlanta, GA
sweeper

sweeper

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
38
Location
Macon, GA
When you treat athletes like a special or protected class with:
1) different admission criteria
2) specialized / restricted schedules
3) sequestration from the general student population with housing and dining facilities
4) opportunities for income that arise only by association with and while enrolled at the school

one can make the argument that you are no longer a student, not in the traditional sense. Heck, with the portal, I’m not even sure the players are going to classes anymore with any regularity. If that is the case, the only thread tying them to a student label is gone.

Get back to all traditional student athletes and you get out of this morass. Of course, who is going to do that willingly?
 
leatherneckjacket

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,076
Location
Atlanta, GA
sweeper said:
When you treat athletes like a special or protected class with:
1) different admission criteria
2) specialized / restricted schedules
3) sequestration from the general student population with housing and dining facilities
4) opportunities for income that arise only by association with and while enrolled at the school

one can make the argument that you are no longer a student, not in the traditional sense. Heck, with the portal, I’m not even sure the players are going to classes anymore with any regularity. If that is the case, the only thread tying them to a student label is gone.

Get back to all traditional student athletes and you get out of this morass. Of course, who is going to do that willingly?
Click to expand...
They are not regular students. They are student athletes. They are also not employees. The janitors at the school do not get these special treatments.
 
Northeast Stinger

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,719
sweeper said:
When you treat athletes like a special or protected class with:
1) different admission criteria
2) specialized / restricted schedules
3) sequestration from the general student population with housing and dining facilities
4) opportunities for income that arise only by association with and while enrolled at the school

one can make the argument that you are no longer a student, not in the traditional sense. Heck, with the portal, I’m not even sure the players are going to classes anymore with any regularity. If that is the case, the only thread tying them to a student label is gone.

Get back to all traditional student athletes and you get out of this morass. Of course, who is going to do that willingly?
Click to expand...
I think number 3 may be the worst part of this. One of the important pedagogical features of college learning is to expose you to different points of view from a diverse cohort. Special admissions used to be justified by the need to create a diverse student body that reflected the diversity of the real world. Segregating student athletes defeats the whole purpose of having a well rounded student body, robbing both the athletes and the other students. In worst cases it creates an entitled or elitist attitude in certain athletes.
 
sweeper

sweeper

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
38
Location
Macon, GA
You are correct leatherneckjacket, they are not regular students. That is the problem. We want to think they are and act like they are but treat them like they’re not. You cannot live in these 2 worlds at the same time per the NLRB
 
roadkill

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,815
I see an analogy here with how the IRS defines an employee vs. an independent contractor. Most state laws are similar. An individual is an independent contractor if the payer has the right to control or direct only the result of the work and not what will be done and how it will be done. Schools control quite precisely how an athlete does their work, including setting detailed schedules and training them down to the level of what steps to take (literally) in the performance of their duties. In any other context, that's how an entity treats an employee.

I think that the key issue that has now surfaced has to do with compensation. In the past, although the athlete's work was done in exchange for a scholarship, which could be considered compensation, it was overlooked. Then, the additional cost of attendance was added. Now, even though NIL is provided by a third party, it has the appearance of association with the school and is impossible to overlook.

I wonder if (thinking out loud here) this is going in the direction of having athletes be employees of the NIL collective, which then contracts with the school they align with. This would provide some isolation for the school and allow athlete's compensation to be kept private. The athlete could also be required to sign a contract with the collective which locks them in for a certain number of seasons.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,850
stinger78 said:
The day UNC leaves the conference that the Triangle built will be the day before the conference dies.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. If UNC leaves that is when the ACC dies.
If UNC left I would expect UVA to follow them.

FWIW, my understanding is that ESPN can only renegotiate the contract with the ACC if there are fewer than 14 teams in the conference (including ND - since they play all sports except football in the ACC).
So at least 5 schools would have to depart for that to happen. This is part of why ACC chose to add 3 teams last year, provides a larger cushion.

Also, keep in mind the B12 has managed to survive despite constant changes in membership. There will have to be a place for programs not in the P2.
The PAC 12 collasped due to epic mismangement and not realizing the money for TV rights was dwindling - but in the end 10 of the 12 schools found a spot in another "power' conference.

I think the story is less "is the ACC going to collapse", I don't see that as a high likelihood because teams find places to end up and even if a handful of programs make it into the P2, there is still a certain amount of content that has to be filled and the P2 will not be able to fill it all.

I think the story is more "what will the ACC look like in the 2030's, what will its membership be, what will its media contract be and how doe sthat compare to the P2".

We should also remember that at the end of the day it isn't really the media contracts that drive the large difference in revenues between schools in conferences, it is all the ancilliary revenue. Ohio St had $250M in revenue last year, compare that to GT (heck compare it to anyone in the ACC). What drives that difference is not the media contract, it is all the other revenue they are able to generate because they are a much larger school with a much larger alumni/fanbase. That's why the largest schools with the largest fanbases seem to rise to the top so often, they are simply able to generate more revenue.
Changing conferences doesn't really change that dynamic for most schools.
 
leatherneckjacket

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,076
Location
Atlanta, GA
sweeper said:
You are correct leatherneckjacket, they are not regular students. That is the problem. We want to think they are and act like they are but treat them like they’re not. You cannot live in these 2 worlds at the same time per the NLRB
Click to expand...
First of all, yes, you can live in the same two worlds. There are plenty of students who receive scholarships (aka compensation) from the school who have special privileges that are not employees. Many support the billions of dollars of research that flow the school without gaining employee status from the university. There are also kids who receive scholarships to play sports at private high schools. Does that make them employees of the high school?

Second, the only reason these student athletes are being designated as employees is because a single bureaucrat in the NLRB thinks they are being exploited. This one bureaucrat will not have the final say. It will either have to codified by law or make its way through through judicial review.

Regardless, if this does somehow come to pass that they are employees, I will stop supporting college sports. It will not get one more dime from me. I will cancel my scholarship endowment and direct it towards another cause.

Finally, I think the unintended consequences of this will be both horrific and hilarious as most of these kids will now not be able to pay their tax bills and will probably be forced out of school for not paying their tuition. Getting a check every month and paying your bills on time is a lot different than having the school take care of everything for you. You want to be an employee then its time to grow up and act like one.
 
leatherneckjacket

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,076
Location
Atlanta, GA
Augusta_Jacket said:
To be fair, the upper level managers in my company get perks I could only dream of. We are still both employees of my company.
Click to expand...
I do not think you can classify the athletes on our football team to be upper level managers of the university, but your point is taken. Yes, executives and common workers do not receive the same perks.

By the way, the inverse is also true. There are students who receive similar benefits with academic scholarships that have not been designated as employees. I wonder why the NLRB chose not to include them in their ruling.
 
Top