Those two things are not mutually exclusive.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Death of College Football and Amateurism
- Thread starter CPVbuff
- Start date
White_Rabbit
Well-Known Member
People need to ask themselves:
Am I upset about this because of how it might work for CU
or
Am I upset about this because of how it will help the athletes
I get the concern about what kind of Pandora's box we're opening, but not paying these guys with all of the money flying around the CFB world and none of it going to them is just plain wrong.
Am I upset about this because of how it might work for CU
or
Am I upset about this because of how it will help the athletes
I get the concern about what kind of Pandora's box we're opening, but not paying these guys with all of the money flying around the CFB world and none of it going to them is just plain wrong.
I feel like a lot of people in the media are trying to come up with rules and stipulations out of their ass in an attempt to keep things the way they are, when the whole point of this is to completely go against the way things currently are. The actual legislation isn’t going to limit profiting off likeness to Sophomores, Juniors and Seniors only, and the NCAA can’t make a rule that supersedes the law, so that idea is a non starter.
In my mind it would spread the talent to more schools and limit stockpiling talent. So it would create more parity.
It was just an idea and one posited without really thinking of all the consequences, good or bad. Certainly it would trickle down and hurt the more borderline athletes.
Eh, the guy that was bringing it up was a former college football player that is adamant about paying players so I wouldn't necessarily say he's bringing it up to keep things the way they are. I don't see why many in the media in general would not want to keep things the way they are any more than the normal population of fans are split on what to do.
The basic problem is that people are not being paid at a level that is commiserate with the value that they generate for their employers, and their employers have a government approved oligopsonistic cartel that sets wages at this below market value.
Yes, some of the workers are probably getting paid a greater value than what they generate (practice squad kid on full scholarship), but many are getting paid far, far less than the value they create.
Yes, they are getting something of value - a college degree from _insert university here_ is, in fact valuable. But it's value in many cases is far less than value they've created.
Even with those two things being true, you are still left with the basic problem of people not being paid at a level that is commiserate with the value that they generate for their employers - and their employers are operating a government approved cartel to keep it that way.
Yes, some of the workers are probably getting paid a greater value than what they generate (practice squad kid on full scholarship), but many are getting paid far, far less than the value they create.
Yes, they are getting something of value - a college degree from _insert university here_ is, in fact valuable. But it's value in many cases is far less than value they've created.
Even with those two things being true, you are still left with the basic problem of people not being paid at a level that is commiserate with the value that they generate for their employers - and their employers are operating a government approved cartel to keep it that way.
Maybe global warming will drive players to cooler climates.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Plus every slippery slope argument about advantages in resources, recruiting and results is exactly the system we have today.
something something states rights except when I don’t like it.
Nebraska jumps all-in on paying athletes, as this is their single best chance of becoming nationally relevant again. The NIL would favor teams who have rabid and retarded fan bases. Follow the $$$.
The Athletic
I don't know. Athletes will soon be free-agents to choose which school presents them with the chance to make the most money. Colorado is at a huge disadvantage here, because, well, just turn on local sports radio. They only talk about Broncos. While our market is larger, the interest is much smaller. Nebraska players will make much more money. Good luck with "open competition".
There's a reason why the NFL has a draft. CFB dies with this in my opinion.
The Athletic
I don't know. Athletes will soon be free-agents to choose which school presents them with the chance to make the most money. Colorado is at a huge disadvantage here, because, well, just turn on local sports radio. They only talk about Broncos. While our market is larger, the interest is much smaller. Nebraska players will make much more money. Good luck with "open competition".
There's a reason why the NFL has a draft. CFB dies with this in my opinion.
The Huskers might have a large fanbase but their state doesn't have that many people. If the team goes south, the fanbase might become fickle. Wouldn't it be better to rely on the state's population than fanbase when making those decisions on attending college?
I wouldn't bet on the Broncos being good as usual with the coming change in ownership. Mr B's daughters might have the blood lines but do they have the moxie to succeed like daddy did? I do not expect the Broncos to match the success of Mr B having more Super Bowl appearances than losing seasons.
It's critical that the Buffs get out of its slump in football as soon as possible. There is still some upside for potential CU recruits.
Good. With so much changing, the NCAA needs a strong leader. Emmert seemed like he was unwilling to fight for anything.
Except stringent sanctions on Slippery Rock and Southwest Missouri State.
****ing Slippery Rock has a football team? That reminds me of the NBC commercial when I was a kid, "The More You Know."
Hard to tell if this is ND bull****, but it fits the narrative of what we are saying here, so I guess I’ll go with it. ND does what’s best for ND, and if that means throwing gas on the fire to speed up the demise of D-1 college football, they’ll do it. The mid 30’s timetable makes some sense. There’s a lot to unravel in terms of traditional college football traditions. They will have to tear down a lot of stuff before the rebuilding can begin. I don’t even know if I want. I to be part of any super elite college football alliance. I don’t believe we have the stomach to compete at that level.
ND does what is best for ND, so does Alabama, Texas, Texas A&M, Ohio State, Clemson, etc. etc.
The amount of money involved in many different aspects of college sports leaves no option except for a complete restructuring of college sports built around football.
There is a real question for the schools about what the role of sports will be in their university. Are they student athletes, are they athletes who pretend to be students, do they not even pretend and have what are essentially professional athletes who might take some classes?
We already have a situation where almost every D1 school (and most FCS and even D2 schools) have their highest paid employees being the head coaches and in some cases they have assistant coaches making significantly more than any other university employee.
When it does happen there will be some other real questions. How do schools justify the millions of dollars they have put into top end facilities only to tell their fans/alumni/donors that they are no longer going to compete "at the top level."
Many are already deluding themselves. Look up the road at CSU who has built a $230 million on campus stadium plus an IPF and other expenditures attempting to convince themselves and their fans that they are "big time." We and everyone else knows that they already aren't but they maintain the illusion.
In the end I don't see CU being a part of the top end when it comes down to it.
It doesn’t seem that people are clicking through the link in the tweet about the interview with Norte Dame’s AD Jack Swarbrick. After reading it, my take is that Swarbrick is going the opposite direction, saying that Norte Dame Athletics will always be tied to the larger educational mission, and, further, that the head of the university will always remain in control of decisions. That is their model, and whether you like Norte Dame or not, it has largely walked its talk.
The larger issue that Swarbrick brings up is that there are certain universities that want a model where athletics is effectively independent, akin to a licensing agreement for the university name, but athletics not controlled by the academic leadership (SI suggested this as the Oregon Ducks model). If anything, Swarbrick seemed very much in the same camp as CU philosophically, although one wonders how anything shakes out.
He also flatly answered “No” when asked if the NIL was sustainable, suggesting that it morphed fairly quickly into a fee based talent acquisition model which was not the expectation.
Teams that want to compete in that upper echelon, where there is no stated academic mission, will break off. I only really see USC and maybe Oregon pursuing that model from the PAC 12. A lot of people throw Washington in there, but that’s not the read I get at all from that university.
The larger issue that Swarbrick brings up is that there are certain universities that want a model where athletics is effectively independent, akin to a licensing agreement for the university name, but athletics not controlled by the academic leadership (SI suggested this as the Oregon Ducks model). If anything, Swarbrick seemed very much in the same camp as CU philosophically, although one wonders how anything shakes out.
He also flatly answered “No” when asked if the NIL was sustainable, suggesting that it morphed fairly quickly into a fee based talent acquisition model which was not the expectation.
Teams that want to compete in that upper echelon, where there is no stated academic mission, will break off. I only really see USC and maybe Oregon pursuing that model from the PAC 12. A lot of people throw Washington in there, but that’s not the read I get at all from that university.
I read it, I just don’t know whether it’s window dressing bull**** from ND or not. Sure, they like to talk about the mission of the university, but I wonder if when push comes to shove if they’ll decide they are a college athletics blue blood and aren’t willing to give that up.
Mid 2030's seem like an eternity these days but that makes sense due to the existing TV contracts. Just wait and see how long the new B1G TV contract is going to be followed by the P12.
I think this could hurt college sports in general due to the uncertain future of college athletics in general in this country as long as Congress does not do anything to address the NIL issues that are potentially affecting competitive balance in college athletics.
This is a great time for professional soccer to make inroads in the USA.
Notre Dame has always tried to present themselves as being above the mere football factories. When it comes down to it though they choose winning over integrity.
There are many examples but the best is their hiring of Lou Holtz. Prior to Notre Dame Lou had multiple head coaching jobs. Not a single one of those schools was left without NCAA sanctions upon his leaving. He cheated at every stop.
They also have been more than willing to look the other way when it involves a star player.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/family-lizzy-seeberg-college-freshman-accused-notre-dame/story?id=12448195
https://247sports.com/college/notre...re-Dame-And-The-Blazer-Accusations-131844421/
and there is more out there. Are they as bad as some other schools? No. Are they some model of integrity for others to imitate? Absolutely not.
Is USC the school interested in allowing USC the athletic department to break away from the academic mission and still use the University name? Maybe I'm over thinking it, but I feel like there could be some Universities who say no to that.
Notre Dame walks the walk. Unlike other elite programs, they mix athletes with regular students for housing, they were the last holdout on redshirting, and they maintain higher than NCAA minimum admission standards for athletes. You can hate them all you want, but they do things the right way. And if things shake out like the interview suggested, Notre Dame is going to be leading the group we'll want CU to be a part of.
I guess time will tell. I have my doubts.
The NCAA has become toothless. No one wants to upset the money at FBS. I think the NCAA dies/ends ONLY for the FBS football programs. while it continues on for mens basketball and the non revenue sports where its still valuable writing rules, somewhat leveling the playing field and organizing playoffs.
Its a shame the NCAA never set up playoffs for D1 and never managed the TV money. Oh well.