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!
Lol, why is this political for you? Okay, nevermind, I really want to respond to the bolded. Instead of a scholarship with a promise now of four years, they would sign contracts to get paid for four years. Just like the employee (NFL style) they want to become. So they can't just be fired without cause per however those contracts work out.
Read the demand(s) carefully, they're not asking for any particular "sport's revenue" to be distributed evenly across that particular sport; they're asking for "conference revenue" to be distributed evenly across athletes "in their respective sports."
Here's the exact quote. We may have fundamental differences in our understanding of English.
Student athletes didn’t sign up for rigidity?! Ha, I take it you didn’t play any sports.
- CU Boulder Out of State Tuition, which is what all scholarship athletes are classified as, costs right around $40k/year. If you average that across the conference of 7k athletes, that's $280m just for tuition.
The moment the players are no longer required to go to class, aka become professionals, I think that link will be broken.
Because they would still get $$$ from licensing deals, donations, more regular students wanting to attend, etc. Universities need athletics and the athletics also need the University branding and affiliation. If the Buffs broke away from the University, they wouldn't be able to carry the logo or naming anymore. They'd be called the Boulder Bison or some **** and nobody would care about them anymore. Someone said it earlier, but fans care about the name on the front a whole helluva lot more than the name on the back.
Not to argue but where did you get 20K a year. I found closer to 35K year.
Where did you get that OOS tuition number? I looked it up and the CU site says $41k/year.
What's the "their" refer to? The athletes or the the sport?
See my post above. Also if they cease to become students, the tax deductability of donations to athletics, which helps fund them, becomes questionable, heck congress already eliminated deductability of mandatory donations (seat licenses). It is my opinion that once athlete cease being students and become mere employees the value proposition, emotional attachment, and relationship to the University will cease. The money is there because people went to school with the players, they sent their kids to go to school there, some played there, etc.. Nobody feels that way about the time they spent at AA or AAA. Can you command premium pricing for professional football when the NFL is already there? Is the TV interest going to be there?
Whoops, I missed the whole "per semester" thing. Thanks, so basically, scholarships cover the entirety of the 50% revenue share from the Pac 12 model.
you lost me. I'm positive 'their' refers to athletes playing whatever sports' revenue we're discussing. "Their" cannot refer to the sports, it must, by definition, refer to the people playing the sports.
And it still doesn’t matter. Sports is still a “must have” for people that they’ll seek out and pay significant premiums to watch. College football is still big business.
It wouldn't be if it wasn't associated with the Universities, though.
That number includes all full scholarship, partials, and walk-ons. 7k/12 is 583 per school and you don't have that many scholarships available. I may be off a little but by adding up all the limits in the NCAA manual there are 237.5 scholarships for women and 221.3 for men, which is 458.8 total for every NCAA sponsored sport.Pac-12 announces 2018-19 financial results
Consolidated revenue reported at $530M with total distributions at $387M, increases of 7% and 9% year-on-yearwww.google.com
That’s all I could find was 7K, I’d imagine the majority are scholarship. You have 1,020 football players from 12 schools.
This is why the players are in fantastic bargaining position. The schools need the sports more than the players need the scholarships.
I don't know, the players aren't going to get paid like they want to without the big money that comes with CFB, but ONLY if "college football" is still actually associated with the Universities. Everyone needs each other pretty equally, tbh.
it didn't jump out until I read your post, but yes, 50% of [top line] revenue is a lot (vs 50% of profits). like @skibum said though, this is a negotiation and that's their opening position.
College football can’t make big money without really good players. If the best players aren’t involved, the revenue isn’t there. That’s why so few non P5 schools make big money. The players are the thing. The only reason why the schools matter today is because of tradition. The money comes from the quality of play.
