What's new
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!

Parity in College Football

The Alabaster Yak

Club Member
Club Member
Scholarship limits were implemented with fairness and parity in mind, but clearly hasn’t worked long term. Would you support a coaching salary pool cap like Joel suggests in order to create more parity? I assume his arbitrary $11m is assistant pool, but maybe a larger, total number should include head coach as well? Thoughts?

 
Scholarship limits were implemented with fairness and parity in mind, but clearly hasn’t worked long term. Would you support a coaching salary pool cap like Joel suggests in order to create more parity? I assume his arbitrary $11m is assistant pool, but maybe a larger, total number should include head coach as well? Thoughts?


Do It Now GIF by @ICT_MrP
 
I’m all for it. And, I would include head coach in the 11 million. These coaches are making more than anyone else at the university. You want unlimited? Make a development league.
I would say take the avg total comp for all 65 P5 HC + avg total comp for all 65 P5 AC salary pool and that should be the cap. No idea what that number would be but that would seem reasonable to me.
 
Scholarship limits were implemented with fairness and parity in mind, but clearly hasn’t worked long term. Would you support a coaching salary pool cap like Joel suggests in order to create more parity? I assume his arbitrary $11m is assistant pool, but maybe a larger, total number should include head coach as well? Thoughts?


They should limit the compensation for know-it-all announcers and tell Klatt to STFU. This is America. We don’t limit someone’s prosperity in the interest of those less prosperous.
That is a very dangerous path.
 
Will never happen. College football can’t be regulated anymore. The power solely lies with 10-12 teams who can and will do their own thing if they try to pass things they don’t like and which will affect their competitiveness and bottom line.

College football is the complete antithesis to the way professional sports are run in the US. You either embrace it or start looking for another hobby.
 
It would have to be implemented at the conference level, as the NCAA is a toothless entity at this point. I can’t imagine the folks at the SEC would agree to something like this. So, while it’s a fine idea in theory, implementation is virtually impossible.
 
What? The NFL and NBA do it. As does MLB, in their way with the CBT.
1. They don’t limit coaches pay.

2. I wouldn’t hold pro sports as ANY example of free market principles. They are just another example of government granted monopolies that allow the rich to get richer at the expense of labor
 
I don’t think anybody is saying something like this would be imposed in CFB by a governmental authority. That would be improper. However, if the leadership in college athletics wanted to adopt something like this, that’s the free market in action.
 
Scholarship limits were implemented with fairness and parity in mind, but clearly hasn’t worked long term. Would you support a coaching salary pool cap like Joel suggests in order to create more parity? I assume his arbitrary $11m is assistant pool, but maybe a larger, total number should include head coach as well? Thoughts?


No
 
Also, of course this will never happen because it would take complete and total agreement from all the blue bloods, and there’s zero incentive for them to do it, as well as one governing body to enforce it.

Down the road, when the bottom half of P5 is left behind, maybe that group will institute something like this.
 
Eff it. No salary cap, no leagues, Katy bar the door. Everyone above the age of 18 is eligible to play anywhere. Affiliation with universities is optional. NFL competes with AL, GA, USC.

Only kinda kidding.
 
1. They don’t limit coaches pay.

2. I wouldn’t hold pro sports as ANY example of free market principles. They are just another example of government granted monopolies that allow the rich to get richer at the expense of labor
Players are limited on their pay, why are they different than coaches? Why does every aspect of our society have to based on pure Capitalistic principles? That’s weird
 
Players are limited on their pay, why are they different than coaches? Why does every aspect of our society have to based on pure Capitalistic principles? That’s weird

1..the players should not have their compensation limited.

2..the principles of capitalism work 100% of the time. The problem is that because of the integration of corporations and the government, we very rarely see it
 
1..the players should not have their compensation limited.

2..the principles of capitalism work 100% of the time. The problem is that because of the integration of corporations and the government, we very rarely see it
Competitive balance in sport requires an even playing field and the leagues have decided that’s best for their business. Why do you have a problem with that
 
Competitive balance in sport requires an even playing field and the leagues have decided that’s best for their business. Why do you have a problem with that
Because I don’t believe that management should be allowed to put a cap on the earnings of labor as it relates to the value of that labor.

i understand the problem of competitive balance but if pro sports didn’t own a monopoly on the amount of teams they allow in their respective leagues, the balance would attain equilibrium
 
If parity is the goal, there should also be a limit on what a school can spend on recruiting.
This would absolutely work against parity.

A school like Colorado is in a state that produces maybe 15 quality P5 prospects per year and is 1,000 miles away from talent bases.

In contrast a school like Georgia, USC, Texas, LSU could fill 10 classes with kids within a 2 hour drive of the school.

I could support a limit on coaching salary pool but include in that all of the associated salaries as well. The quality control consultants, the video analyst, the recruiting coordinators, etc.
 
Because I don’t believe that management should be allowed to put a cap on the earnings of labor as it relates to the value of that labor.

i understand the problem of competitive balance but if pro sports didn’t own a monopoly on the amount of teams they allow in their respective leagues, the balance would attain equilibrium
I don't understand how you can square 100% Unrestrained Capitalism being good, but Monopolies being bad. Monopolies only happen in two situations:

1) Unrestrained Capitalism, or
2) Governmental allowed Monopolies
 
Because I don’t believe that management should be allowed to put a cap on the earnings of labor as it relates to the value of that labor.

i understand the problem of competitive balance but if pro sports didn’t own a monopoly on the amount of teams they allow in their respective leagues, the balance would attain equilibrium
Or maybe the leagues themselves are simply the best because of it, and others that have existed over time aren’t as good and have failed. It’s Capitalism at its finest. You’re a weird argument
 
Capitalism, at its core, is an economic system whereby companies are allowed to work in their own self interest. In the NFL, it was determined that they would all benefit if the league had better parity. The result was that they instituted measures to promote that goal. If college football did the same, with no inducement from a central authority, that would mean they did what was in their best interests - capitalism.

problem is, it’s not in the best interests of at least half the schools in the SEC and a third of the schools in the B1G. Therefore it will never happen.
 
I don't understand how you can square 100% Unrestrained Capitalism being good, but Monopolies being bad. Monopolies only happen in two situations:

1) Unrestrained Capitalism, or
2) Governmental allowed Monopolies
Because when you look at the history of monopolies, most if not all were allowed to develop because government intervention kept competitors from entering the market.

when I was growing up there were only three networks because the FCC only granted three licenses for national broadcasters.

There are a lot more examples but that scenario is playing out even more dramatically now which is why the lobbyist industry has grown so much. R’s and D’s are equally to blame
 
Or maybe the leagues themselves are simply the best because of it, and others that have existed over time aren’t as good and have failed. It’s Capitalism at its finest. You’re a weird argument
Expect for the fact that publicly funded infrastructure has made that success possible.

The new lacrosse league has an interesting model in that the players own the league. That is a model that might shake things up in future
 
Back
Top