The End of College Sports As We Know It

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,993
The NFL is, and never will be, interested in “sponsoring” a minor league. Their players get developed for free as is. They are not going to start spending hundreds of millions of dollars when they don’t have to
Understand. All it takes is one team to see the sponsorship opportunity to bring young, developing players into a "college" league with lots of fans who will drop tons of money on their program. After that, the ball is rolling.
 

901jacket

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
19
I think if you want to keep sliding down the slippery slope, if you separate the academics, is there a need for the Freshman-Senior designation anymore? What’s to say a player has to leave after 4 years only to potentially make less money on an NFL rookie contract?
 

Thwg777

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
358
I think if you want to keep sliding down the slippery slope, if you separate the academics, is there a need for the Freshman-Senior designation anymore? What’s to say a player has to leave after 4 years only to potentially make less money on an NFL rookie contract?

While I agree with this logic, I’d also argue the opposite too. Any person should be draft eligible by the NFL. It’s up to the NFL if they want to take them. Sotomayor mucked up the Clarett case many years ago.
 

stech81

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,726
Location
Woodstock Georgia
If GT drops down in football we should demolish BDS and build a nice High School Stadium. Won’t need anything bigger. That move likely kills off most other GT sports. But by God we are principled.
The thing some do not understand this will be the end of watching your team on TV. This is what ESPN wants the end of all conference contracts and the only ones on TV will be the ones willing to spend money. I think all but maybe one SEC will join. The Big 12 maybe 3 or 4, the ACC Clemson, FSU and maybe 2 more, Not sure about the Big 10.
So if you want to is Tech's team plan to get season tickets cuase those who don't join will be left out.
And I really think ESPN is behind this crap.
 

cpf2001

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
809
Lots of streaming network competitors out there who would probably love to pick up 80% of college football games if ESPN only took the top 20%… but they probably aren’t gonna be paying nearly as much as all those schools get today. You’ll be able to watch but GT has a lot of debt that would be crushing overall.

Interesting situation for Cabrera. He seems ambitious and to truly want to excel in all areas, even the more outreach/PR/marketing ones like sports. Vs previous presidents who struck me as uncreative and largely of a “bitter about not getting into MIT so trying to just turn GT into that” mindset instead of embracing the uniqueness and challenge.
 

ThatGuy

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
837
Location
Evergreen, CO
Last night I found myself thinking about the new "Power 2" alignment of college football. It made me think, "How does one account for Vandy? And Northwestern? And other "lesser" teams?

Then I realized, "if the 'eye test' is what's really important, then you have to show you're going up against the so-called best. So why wouldn't the SEC schedule Bama and uGA and other presumed frontrunners try to arrange it so that they only play each other, and then the 'lesser' teams play each other? Otherwise, the other of the P2 conferences might look like more of a power conference."

Which led me to realizing again that, over time, in order to lessen the impact of travel and whatnot the B1G and SEC will basically revert to localized divisions. The conferences are too big to continue with an "everybody plays everybody" approach. Which will of course effectively eliminate the whole reason for consolidation to begin with.

Such is the nature of modern CFB.

In that instance, I could see Vandy and the other "lesser" SEC teams being put into their own division, and the "premier" teams being in another division. Which would allow the "premier" SEC teams to ultimately split off and take their TV revenue with them.

Which brings us to today. Imagine my surprise when I saw this proposal. It almost seems like the NCAA is saying, "hell, let's just skip the 'realizing our conferences are too big to be manageable' moment and move on with the "Kick out anyone who cares about academics" approach.

Sheesh.

Now I have a headache just thinking about it again.

2nd thought: I wonder if they wrote the "enhanced educational benefits" section specifically for UNC... 🤔
 

BCJacket

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
689
I mean, the whole idea here is that if schools are able to pay players directly, i.e. make them employees, then they can reign in the NIL and transfer silliness. The NIL laws were all based around schools not being able to prohibit athletes from doing something any other student is able to. But if you're an employee, it's a different story, your contract can say whatever.

I'm not so doom and gloom about it because the schools that spend a lot don't spend so much because they want to. They spend so much to compete with the other schools that are. It's keeping up with the Joneses Sabans. This proposal would allow the schools to set rules and limits on things like NIL, transfers, coaching staffs, Academic rules, etc. Yes, a handful of SEC schools would probably be fine with unlimited spending, no academics, unlimited staff, free agency, etc. But most would not. Few of the B1G or ACC schools would be ok with it. We've had even Saban and Kiffin come out against how out of control these things are. There's a reason every pro league has a salary cap or at least a luxury tax. This proposal would recognize the reality that CFB has become professionalized already and let the schools implement professional-style rules and limits.

I think we see a medium sized group of ~60ish 'Power 5' schools come together on a new set of rules. Schools can pay players directly (and there's a spending cap). Players sign exclusive NIL contracts with the school and they get a cut of the revenue generated from their individual value. With likely some allowable NIL activities outside- like personal appearances. Limits on recruiting staff and coaching assistants. Player contracts that last some number of years. Limits on transfers. We probably also see a players' union which will fight and negotiate on the salaries and NIL, free agency/transfer rules, etc.
 

Bogey

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,230
That's what the P2 is set up for. I said it almost two years ago that realignment towards the mega deathstars of SEC and B1G were setting up something big, and possibly rival pro leagues (see the footprint and how the B1G is modeled).

Here we are today, and the landscape is moving closer to what I predicted.
I disagree. My son spends a lot of time in the mid west with his wife's family. They are huge college football fans and do not care one bit for the $EC. When the break happens, I think fans will be surprised to learn how much many of the B1G schools favor academics over pro type leagues and will not trek down the same path as the $EC is headed.
 

BleedGoldNWhite21

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,298
I think you guys are underestimating how successful and popular the “academics” league would be. Think of how much major college football is played around the country and how many games are shown on TV. The vast majority of those programs would not be in the “pro” league. Iowa is a random but good example. They have been a very respectful program the last twenty years, winning 10 plus games eight times in that span, including this year. They ranked 19th in attendance this year. Iowa is not a blue blood. They would not join the “pro” league. That’s a pretty damn good football program- a pretty damn good BRAND not in the pro league. You’ll say that the recruiting will take a nose dive for the “academic” league, but college football has always been about the BRAND(school, Fight songs, traditions etc) more than the quality of play. You want proof of that? Look at every other attempt at a pro football league. USFL, XFL etc. All of those players were good college players but the product on the field stinks…yet it’s not worse than a lot of college games. Why do we care about the college games? The BRAND. It’s the fight song, the pageantry that makes a FG kicker missing a 32 yarder exciting or a QB miss a wide open player fun. That stuff is just pathetic on an XFL team who has no brand. If ESPN won’t, someone else will pay for these brands. It won’t be as much, sure, but it will be more competitive and still quite successful.
 
Last edited:

billga99

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
647
If GT doesn’t opt in then that is the absolute DEATH of GT athletics
The really hard thing to predict is how much TV money would be left for schools not in the top tier. Looking at Group of 5 schools vs. Power 5 schools, it is a very big difference. Looking at the AAC which is probably the highest paid Group of 5 conference, they are getting 7 million per school vs. 30MM+ for Power 5 conferences. That 23 million dollar difference funds a lot of personnel which you likely would lose. If this comes to past, I really wish they would blowup the insanity of 2024 conference alignments and take it back to Regional Alignment. Yes the big SEC schools, FSU, Clemson, maybe UNC would be gone but you could still put together a strong Southeast geographical conference. That would dramatically drop travel cost for non-revenue producing sports which would cover some of the difference.

Obviously I would not be wild about GT not being in the Top Tier. But reality is I still think there would be some interest regardless of whether we are in a different tier.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,695
I think you guys are underestimating how successful and popular the “athletics” league would be. Think of how much major college football is played around the country and how many games are shown on TV. The vast majority of those programs would not be in the “pro” league. Iowa is a random but good example. They have been a very respectful program the last twenty years, winning 10 plus games eight times in that span, including this year. They ranked 19th in attendance this year. Iowa is not a blue blood. They would not join the “pro” league. That’s a pretty damn good football program- a pretty damn good BRAND not in the pro league. You’ll say that the recruiting will take a nose dive for the “academic” league, but college football has always been about the BRAND(school, Fight songs, traditions etc) more than the quality of play. You want proof of that? Look at every other attempt at a pro football league. USFL, XFL etc. All of those players were good college players but the product on the field stinks…yet it’s not worse than a lot of college games. Why do we care about the college games? The BRAND. It’s the fight song, the pageantry that makes a FG kicker missing a 32 yarder exciting or a QB miss a wide open player fun. That stuff is just pathetic on an XFL team who has no brand. If ESPN won’t, someone else will pay for these brands. It won’t be as much, sure, but it will be more competitive and still quite successful.
“The brand” is complicated.

Lots of uga fans do not associate football with academics. The flags they fly in their yards, the stickers on their cars, and the sweat shirts they wear in the grocery stores, are about something else. Especially if they dropped out of high school.

On the other hand, the two best “college brand games” one can experience are Army vs Navy and Yale at Harvard. Catch either one if you get the chance.

But the money is in the first example.
 

BleedGoldNWhite21

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,298
“The brand” is complicated.

Lots of uga fans do not associate football with academics. The flags they fly in their yards, the stickers on their cars, and the sweat shirts they wear in the grocery stores, are about something else. Especially if they dropped out of high school.

On the other hand, the two best “college brand games” one can experience are Army vs Navy and Yale at Harvard. Catch either one if you get the chance.

But the money is in the first example.

Well for that particular example, UGA wouldn’t be in the “academics” group. They would be in the pros or whatever that or super 30 team is.

The really hard thing to predict is how much TV money would be left for schools not in the top tier. Looking at Group of 5 schools vs. Power 5 schools, it is a very big difference. Looking at the AAC which is probably the highest paid Group of 5 conference, they are getting 7 million per school vs. 30MM+ for Power 5 conferences. That 23 million dollar difference funds a lot of personnel which you likely would lose. If this comes to past, I really wish they would blowup the insanity of 2024 conference alignments and take it back to Regional Alignment. Yes the big SEC schools, FSU, Clemson, maybe UNC would be gone but you could still put together a strong Southeast geographical conference. That would dramatically drop travel cost for non-revenue producing sports which would cover some of the difference.

Obviously I would not be wild about GT not being in the Top Tier. But reality is I still think there would be some interest regardless of whether we are in a different tier.

I don’t think G5 is an accurate comparison though. Do you think the appetite for college football is just going to get worse? ESPN and other sports networks still need games and the super semipro league of 30 teams only offers 15 a week. There are two non-ranked P5 teams playing on national networks all the time. I don’t see how or why that can’t still happen. Yes TV deals will be smaller, but again using my example from earlier, there are still a lot of quality football brands that will not be in the super conference that can garner interest. Georgia Tech Virginia Tech used to be a Thursday night staple. I don’t see either of us going to the super conference realistically. Does the enjoyment/interest in that game on tv magically completely go away? I don’t buy it.
 
Top