Use replacement players
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!
Pac 12 players threaten opt-out of 2020 CFB season unless health and safety and other demands are met
- Thread starter Jens1893
- Start date
The XFL was filled with guys who were elite CFB players but couldn't make it in the NFL, and nobody watched. Yes, good players and high quality play is part of it, but the main reason there is big money is because fans are emotionally tied to a team and want to watch their team do well. If Trevor Lawrence and Justin Fields weren't playing in college, someone else would be.
show your math.
How many players do you think we’re talking about? In the B1G, there are 14 schools each getting $50 million just for football. $25 million per school divided by 100 is $250K. Where do you get $68K.
Yeah, and no one cares about those guys because they’re not future pros. XFL isn’t the NFL. College is “a lot of guys who will be NFL”. That’s the hook. Bad players = no money.
now carry it one step further.
how badly do the schools need this current group of players? If both sides hold firm, the current players all opt out, and the universities offer those positions to other players willing to play under the current model, I'd root just as hard for CU, I'd be just as likely to attend a game, just as likely to watch it on TV and just as likely to buy team merch. I guess the question is whether the BMDs will be just as likely to pony up those chips.
I honestly don't see how the players have any leverage here.
You want to sit out because of covid, fine your scholarship is honored for 1 year.
You sit out for any other reasons (like what were listed in their demands) you have broken your contract/scholarship with the school and you are gone.
The guys who want to go pro (or think they can) will not sit out. (See the player for Washington who said he has family that needs to eat)
What will they do to improve their game to get ready for the NFL and to showcase they can play?
They don't have other options as of now. (If there was a minor league, like baseball, maybe it would be different)
There are thousands of kids waiting in line for a chance to get a scholarship and play. Who would also be satisfied with what these athletes are already getting.
I have not seen a list of players that are a part of this, are there any stars, 1st round draft picks, apart of this?
I ask, because until a big name says he isnt playing because of this, all players can be replaced.
You want to sit out because of covid, fine your scholarship is honored for 1 year.
You sit out for any other reasons (like what were listed in their demands) you have broken your contract/scholarship with the school and you are gone.
The guys who want to go pro (or think they can) will not sit out. (See the player for Washington who said he has family that needs to eat)
What will they do to improve their game to get ready for the NFL and to showcase they can play?
They don't have other options as of now. (If there was a minor league, like baseball, maybe it would be different)
There are thousands of kids waiting in line for a chance to get a scholarship and play. Who would also be satisfied with what these athletes are already getting.
I have not seen a list of players that are a part of this, are there any stars, 1st round draft picks, apart of this?
I ask, because until a big name says he isnt playing because of this, all players can be replaced.
Nope. If the players suck, there’s no larger game for the billions in TV revenue. That’s all that matters. If all of the best players didn’t play, big time college football is cooked.
Nobody is tuning into CFB because the players are going to play in the NFL. They are tuning in because they are die hard about their team playing another team.
The players don't have another option, though. Unless The Rock makes the XFL into an 18-23 year old NFL feeder league, they don't have anywhere else to go play.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
It’s cute you think this will stop with football players. In your current model, the P12 would pay their players 259K a year. 265K/1020
85*12=1,020 players
Or 30 million/2 = 15M / 85 = 176K If we go by rough payout.
I’ll just sit back and watch the lawsuits roll on from D1 players demanding revenue sharing for all scholarship players.
Take away the bogus arguments over balance sheets and scholarship values (but if you think that it costs a university the dollar amount that they transfer between departments, I got a bridge...) Instead, just focus on all of the absurdities that you have to accept to side against the players here. College football makes an obscene amount of money. Pro football benefits by having a development system for which they pay nothing. But it is the players who are crazy for wanting some financial and health security when they play an exceedingly dangerous game.
I hear you, but I'm not sure I'm ready to land on the same conclusion.
1. assuming both sides hold firm, all Pac schools will be playing against each other with "second tier" players. To the casual fan, the game isn't going to look all that different.
2. It would certainly be a drop in talent, but I'm not sure these players would 'suck'. the Pac schools would be filling scholarship starting positions with a lot of players who would otherwise be riding the bench at other P5 schools, or with G5 starters.
The G5 doesn’t get ratings now. The quality of play would be so bad that the contracts would be in jeopardy.
In non-revenue sports? Okie dokie.
That’s why using their leverage now is perfect. Normally they lack leverage. Today they are in control to demand more.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
This is America. There will be lawyers willing to take it on.
Huh?
you could be right. I'm just remembering that in the 85 NFL strike they used replacements and TV contracts got bigger on the next round of negotiations. likewise in 1994/95 when MLB went on strike and were bringing up minor leaguers as replacement, the TV contracts got bigger the next round (although in that instance they never played the replacements).
ACK that neither of those analogs are very recent and neither are college sports. we don't have many historical points to reference.
I'm with @TSchekler , I believe that for the most part, college fans tune in to watch their teams, not specific players. I think the same fan base will watch CU-Utah whether they those schools play their current rosters or 'second tier' replacements. I know I would, but maybe I'm in a minority.
If your argument were true, Harvard football games would get the best ratings since they’ve been playing football for a long time and have very rich fans.
I'm not following any more.
To my knowledge, Harvard's football fan base has been very consistent in their support. The team plays in a league which doesn't compete for big TV contracts, yet Harvard games consistently get the highest ratings of any Ivy league (or FCS, for that matter) regular season game.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
I do not understand the obsession with scholarships lack of, “value.” They lack monetary value but they are not invaluable. It’s no different than when say a tax person and a plumber trade favors. Each person gets what they want done and while no money is exchanged both parties got something out of the exchange.
Players deserve full health care 100%
Players deserve the ability to make money on their likenesses 100%
Players deserve 50% of their revenue from a state run institution? Nope, that is a ludicrous demand. This would ruin amateur sports and ruin the appeal of college sports, people like the fact it isn’t pro sports. Maybe 10-25K a year would be reasonable and that’s damn good money when you’re living for free. Especially when you can go out and make money on endorsements. They could do it however they see fit honestly. Base it on wins, bowl wins, make a contract like a football coaches. If they start paying kids 100K plus a year and remove the student part I’ll be out. If you’re not associated with the university that would be stupid, defeats the entire purpose of college football.
Players deserve full health care 100%
Players deserve the ability to make money on their likenesses 100%
Players deserve 50% of their revenue from a state run institution? Nope, that is a ludicrous demand. This would ruin amateur sports and ruin the appeal of college sports, people like the fact it isn’t pro sports. Maybe 10-25K a year would be reasonable and that’s damn good money when you’re living for free. Especially when you can go out and make money on endorsements. They could do it however they see fit honestly. Base it on wins, bowl wins, make a contract like a football coaches. If they start paying kids 100K plus a year and remove the student part I’ll be out. If you’re not associated with the university that would be stupid, defeats the entire purpose of college football.
Last edited by a moderator:
this is a helluva a sentence to parse
What leverage do they have?
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
Edited, thanks lol.
The reason why big time college football gets huge ratings is because they feature very good play on the field. Lower levels don’t get very good ratings comparatively because the quality of play is poor even though many programs are steeped in tradition.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
The leverage that colleges cannot exist without sports. Oh wait, yes they can and lots of kids would play for a scholarship.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
I just don’t see how you can support the players demands here unless you’re perfectly fine with the elimination of non-revenue sports.
Like it or not, football does not exist in a vacuum with collegiate athletic departments. The ONLY reason universities can justify wrestling, tennis, lacrosse, track , or cross country is if they can subsidize those programs with the revenue football (at to some extent basketball) generates. If AD budgets now have to pay participants commensurate with what they generate in revenue, then the sports I mentioned are goners. ADs across the country will drop every sport aside from football at many schools and maybe add Men’s and Women’s basketball at others - that’s it. I think that would be a shame.
If players don’t play, many schools athletic budgets are ****ed.
I am okay with non-revenue sports being sacrificed for capitalism. Yes.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
It has nothing to do with play, it has to do with tradition and allegiance to those schools. If all the current D1 players went to some separate league and colleges brought in all the D2 kids on scholarship, know what happens? Michigan fans Show up 100K strong, as do OSU, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Texas and so on. The fans aren’t going to go where the players go.