House case update

[Sean Miller Fan]

Strong rumors it will be settled for $2 billion worth of back pay to players plus the establishment of a "revenue sharing" model and man do I hate that term. Why dont we call payments to NFL or NBA players revenue sharing? Looks like $20 million per P4 program. Assuming $16 million for football. $4 million for basketball. Then thankfully most of these collectives will go away. If Pitt cant figure out how to win football games with a $16 million payroll, forget it. I think what you'll see is that assistant coaching salaries will come way down because you wont need recruiters anymore. The money recruits. Plus most coaching and support staff salaries are artificially high because there's no player expense.

What this case doesnt do is make them employees. That will be the next case. So still NIL and free transfers until someone sues about not being an employee, a case the NCAA has 0 chance to win.

 

[pafootballguy]

Strong rumors it will be settled for $2 billion worth of back pay to players plus the establishment of a "revenue sharing" model and man do I hate that term. Why dont we call payments to NFL or NBA players revenue sharing? Looks like $20 million per P4 program. Assuming $16 million for football. $4 million for basketball. Then thankfully most of these collectives will go away. If Pitt cant figure out how to win football games with a $16 million payroll, forget it. I think what you'll see is that assistant coaching salaries will come way down because you wont need recruiters anymore. The money recruits. Plus most coaching and support staff salaries are artificially high because there's no player expense.

What this case doesnt do is make them employees. That will be the next case. So still NIL and free transfers until someone sues about not being an employee, a case the NCAA has 0 chance to win.

The max will be 17-22 million, but there will be no requirement that a school shares revenue; if they do, they will not have to share the max.

 

[pafootballguy]

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I haven't been following any of this, because I don't care anymore, but why would it make collectives go away? It's hypothesized that Miami is dropping $20M on NIL for football this season. So why wouldn't they still be $20M ahead of a team spending nothing on NIL?

And expanded scholarships are never a good thing, because it's more guys the big boys can stash. If the scholarships were reduced to like 60, it would create more parity.

 

[Upg bobcat]

I haven't been following any of this, because I don't care anymore, but why would it make collectives go away? It's hypothesized that Miami is dropping $20M on NIL for football this season. So why wouldn't they still be $20M ahead of a team spending nothing on NIL?

And expanded scholarships are never a good thing, because it's more guys the big boys can stash. If the scholarships were reduced to like 60, it would create more parity.

This is exactly what I was going ask. The most attractive school is still going to be the one that can pay you the most. That is going to remain the one with the biggest NIL collective.

To be honest, I'm surprised NFL or NHL or other salary cap sports haven't found a way around the salary cap by just creating a NIL collective. For example, Jimmy Haslam can create a collective for the Browns players. Make them do an internet ad or two for Flying J's and he can pay them a couple extra million more per year. It's for their name, image, and likeness to be used in the commercial, it's not a salary for playing football.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

This is exactly what I was going ask. The most attractive school is still going to be the one that can pay you the most. That is going to remain the one with the biggest NIL collective.

To be honest, I'm surprised NFL or NHL or other salary cap sports haven't found a way around the salary cap by just creating a NIL collective. For example, Jimmy Haslam can create a collective for the Browns players. Make them do an internet ad or two for Flying J's and he can pay them a couple extra million more per year. It's for their name, image, and likeness to be used in the commercial, it's not a salary for playing football.

Or take it really far and pay them league minimum plus NIL for doing a few commercials. I would think the pro leagues wouldn't allow this and create a panel to evaluate how much of these NIL deals are above market rate and anything over that counts towards the cap. This is what the NCAA should be doing.

 

[cashisking884]

Each school isn’t getting 20 million.
That’s what they are allowed to spend. There’s no revenue sharing amongst the schools. Just potentially between school and players.

This doesn’t really make NIL go away. It helps parity some in that Ohio State or UGA or somebody can’t spend 3x the revenue as everybody else. They are limited to a salary cap.”

But salaries caps only work to create parity if all teams are willing to spend near the salary cap, or can. Even if colleges can now spend 20 million, how many can actually afford to do that and will?

 

[h2p_5150]

This is exactly what I was going ask. The most attractive school is still going to be the one that can pay you the most. That is going to remain the one with the biggest NIL collective.

To be honest, I'm surprised NFL or NHL or other salary cap sports haven't found a way around the salary cap by just creating a NIL collective. For example, Jimmy Haslam can create a collective for the Browns players. Make them do an internet ad or two for Flying J's and he can pay them a couple extra million more per year. It's for their name, image, and likeness to be used in the commercial, it's not a salary for playing football.

The NFL owners do skirt the cap some times- the Patriots helped Tom Bradys company financially for instance. But for the most part they don't want to- they have a salary cap in place specifically so they can spend less money on players. This isn't the case for college boosters. These guys love throwing money at players.

 

[Upg bobcat]

The NFL owners do skirt the cap some times- the Patriots helped Tom Bradys company financially for instance. But for the most part they don't want to- they have a salary cap in place specifically so they can spend less money on players. This isn't the case for college boosters. These guys love throwing money at players.

So basically it sounds like you are saying that NFL owners are simply smarter than colleges and their athletic departments (and smarter than owners of non-salary cap leagues like MLB) -- they realize an arms race over salaries is only to their detriment. Or I guess NCAA can't do it because they don't have the antitrust exemption of other pro sports leagues?

Like I said in one thread, NCAA should be able to get the antitrust exemption now that college sports are professional--and it should be able exert more control over the schools and conferences with the antitrust exemption.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

Awesome. Closer to mlb model, bb included. Losing interest in it all by the day.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Each school isn’t getting 20 million.
That’s what they are allowed to spend. There’s no revenue sharing amongst the schools. Just potentially between school and players.

This doesn’t really make NIL go away. It helps parity some in that Ohio State or UGA or somebody can’t spend the revenue as everybody else. They are limited to a salary cap.”

But salaries caps only work to create parity if all teams are willing to spend near the salary cap, or can. Even if colleges can now spend 20 million, how many can actually afford to do that and will?

So Pitt can now get out-spent by $30M/year instead of $15M/year, when one considers this plus NIL.

On top of that, scholarships can got up to 100 so Ohio State can pay their 3rd stringers more than Pitt pays its marquee starters. Sweeeeeet.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

So Pitt can now get out-spent by $30M/year instead of $15M/year, when one considers this plus NIL.

On top of that, scholarships can got up to 100 so Ohio State can pay their 3rd stringers more than Pitt pays its marquee starters. Sweeeeeet.

A good football player who wants to play and has aspirations of going to the pros isn’t going to sit on the bench.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

So Pitt can now get out-spent by $30M/year instead of $15M/year, when one considers this plus NIL.

On top of that, scholarships can got up to 100 so Ohio State can pay their 3rd stringers more than Pitt pays its marquee starters. Sweeeeeet.

I think the expanded scholarship limits is for the non-revenue sports.

Also, I think this is a good thing for Pitt because it was never going to consistently raise enough money from its fanbase. Now, it can spend its own money. $16 million should be able to buy a decent football roster. Maybe you dont have the money to pay the backups but that's enough money to beat Syracuse and Virginia Tech.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I think the expanded scholarship limits is for the non-revenue sports.

Also, I think this is a good thing for Pitt because it was never going to consistently raise enough money from its fanbase. Now, it can spend its own money. $16 million should be able to buy a decent football roster. Maybe you dont have the money to pay the backups but that's enough money to beat Syracuse and Virginia Tech.

Where would Pitt get $16M/year to spend? I would expect like $5M.

Also, it's relative. It's not how much you spend; it's what you spend in comparison to everyone else.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

A good football player who wants to play and has aspirations of going to the pros isn’t going to sit on the bench.

No, a good football player doesn't worry about competition because he thinks he's good enough to go anywhere and get on the field.

Deal One: $100,000/season and you're guaranteed to play

Deal Two: $750,000/season; you practice against the best and whether or not you get on the field is up to you; if it doesn't work out, you can transfer to Pitt after three years for Deal One... If it does work out we double the money.

Hmm, tough one.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Where would Pitt get $16M/year to spend? I would expect like $5M.

Also, it's relative. It's not how much you spend; it's what you spend in comparison to everyone else.

Ticket sales. This would open the door to require A412 contributions with ticket purchases. Also, I'd assume the Panther Club would be eliminated entirely.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I think the expanded scholarship limits is for the non-revenue sports.

It sounds as if they are possibly doing away with the differentiation between head count sports and non-head count sports. Everyone can be on full scholarship rather than all the partial scholarships that most of the current sports are mostly limited to. So no more soccer players or baseball players getting 1/3 of a scholarship, they would potentially get a full ride.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

It sounds as if they are possibly doing away with the differentiation between head count sports and non-head count sports. Everyone can be on full scholarship rather than all the partial scholarships that most of the current sports are mostly limited to. So no more soccer players or baseball players getting 1/3 of a scholarship, they would potentially get a full ride.

If schools want to do that I assume. Cant see Pitt volunteering to give full rides to non-revenue athletes especially when they have to pay football and basketball players directly now....for use of their name, image, and likeness for marketing purposes of course since they STILL cant "pay for play." Hey, QB1, accept this check from the University for $7 million so we can use your image on a season ticket billboard.