That's fine, more elbow room for me. You can go be a Bama or tOSU fan to see the "best"
Its Happening? Money Division
- Thread starter TIGER-PAUL
- Start date
Sure, they will, there won't be enough games for all the channels that want to show them, there's FCS and G5 and D2 games on TV every week now.
Yup, I'll be watching Pitt vs. Villanova on the CW while CBS shows tOSU vs. Georgia.
Yea, for the average Pitt fan who doesn't pay attention to NIL/off-field stuff, this changes almost nothing. We will lose recruits to PSU, OSU, ND, Mich, etc because we cant pay enough. But are we out-recruiting those schools now. We will recruit against WVU, Indiana, Purdue, Kentucky, Maryland, Rutgers, UVa, VT. And we will pay similar money to those schools. Maybe we have to dump the Track & Field team and lower coach salaries across the board to compete with Rutgers, Md, Kentucky, Indiana, etc but the average Pitt fan wont notice any difference. I guess maybe when we start losing coaches to Rutgers they will but coaching doesn't matter as much as talent acquisition.
I seriously hope a large number of schools opt out and refuse to go along with this? How will this affect the tuition regular schmuck students pay? I care way way way more about them than paying athletes.
This will break the ACC GOR. The ACC will need to choose a tier. FSU and Clemson choose the other tier and they are gone.
Then once out they reconsider their tier and off they go.
When the conference membership changes significantly, the tv deals get renegotiated. At some point that figure starts to come down, not go up. I think that point is near.
Then once out they reconsider their tier and off they go.
When the conference membership changes significantly, the tv deals get renegotiated. At some point that figure starts to come down, not go up. I think that point is near.
Charge the heck out of the regular students. If they dont want to go to Pitt then, bye bye. D1 sports is important.
if this happens, I know I won't be watching it any longer. My viewership means squat, but I don't care. And I wish they'd quit calling them "student-athletes". Very few of them are actually students while playing football or basketball. And they're professionals now anyhow.
I think the vast majority of P4 schools, if not all, as well as some in the G5 will be a part of this tier.
Also, the reason the ACC expanded with 3 more schools was so that if schools do leave (and they will pay a hefty sum), the conference doesn't need to renegotiate a new contract.
My question is, what if there is a handful of schools that don't want to participate in a P4 conference (will they be forced to to remain in the conference) or a handful of G5 schools that do want to. What happens then.
For the trust fund portion, at least 50% of the money has to go to women is what I read. The NIL stuff, not so much.
Interesting. I haven't had time to read the whole article. The proposal says that $30K is the minimum and for every male receiving the payment the university would have to pay a female athlete as well. Does this also imply that if an Alabama decided that it wanted to pay all of its football players $200K they would also have to pay a matching number of female athletes the same total amount? That could get pretty costly.
I read somewhere that the conferences can dictate that member schools be in a certain tier. This is where I think the "out" is for schools. They can't kick you out and penalize you for getting kicked out.
It is up to each individual school if they want to be in that tier, but I'm going to guess if you are in the BIG, SEC, ACC or Big XII, they are going to pretty much say you need to be in the upper tier. And I think the vast majority, if not all will want to be.
With priorities like yours, it's easy to see why this country is going down the toilet, it's sad really that it's come to this.
Correct. But if lets say BC says they dont want to be a part of this, they'd almost surely be voted out, as long as the ACC bylaws have removal language.
Every P4 school and probably like 50% of the G5s will be in this.
I think college should be free like in most other developed nations. However, we are cool riddling them with insurmountable debt. So if we are cool with that then I'm cool with a $250 or $500 per semester Athletics surchage. Other schools have done this to help pay for new athletics facilities.
My thought is that we should join the non-pay division, but keep the collective so we can buy the best players for that division. Then rack up a bunch of national championships in that division.
But Pitt would never do that because it would hurt the volleyball and other womens sports programs. The women stand to gain the most from this new "pay" division, so Pitt will sign up for that.
But Pitt would never do that because it would hurt the volleyball and other womens sports programs. The women stand to gain the most from this new "pay" division, so Pitt will sign up for that.
I'd be cool with a large number of schools saying F this and going D3. This is truly insane. I'd like to join the Ivy League or something like that. It's also sick to ask regular students to pay salaries for athletes, they aren't there for the sports. Charging the students a fee to pay athletes is as sick as these NIL collectives asking for money to give to these entitled jocks
I agree, but I won't ever donate to NIL, I'd rather donate to cancer research or homelessness, or even to a fund to decrease tuition for regular students.
I've read several different articles. Each emphasizes a slightly different aspect of the proposal. One article was pretty clear that a minimum $30 per athlete "educational trust fund" would be required for at least 1/2 its athletes and that 1/2 of those athletes must be female. It also made clear that the school could sign NIL agreements on top of the trust fund that could be paid to specific individuals or sports without any required Title IX distribution.
They wouldn't be voted out. If enough teams in the conference agree on a set of rules that they can remain as conference, schools that don't agree will just go their own merry way and join up with a conference with which they agree.
Ok, yea but in my scenario, BC really wanted to stay in for everything but football. So they either get voted out or leave on their own. Maybe they will leave to rejoin the Big East and we can add a B12 team.
Doesn’t mean the product is better. Just means more people have access to tv’s 😂. It is why you will not see many great players anymore. There is no hunger. No adversity. Even the NFL has a worse product with more viewers. Very deceiving. The game itself is stunted.
People cant stop watching college football. This will do nothing to decrease viewership.
Again …..of course there are more ways to watch but it doesn’t mean the quality of play or the sport is better. It’s much worse. Just like the NBA and the NFL. Nobody watches the whole games in the NBA now. They watch highlights or a few minutes at the end. The quality of the game is bad.
If a school opts in, it’s 50/50 split schools have to match each male payment with a female. It’s not football only, it’s not revenue generating sports only. It’s also a minimum of $30k per athlete but no ceiling
Tuesday and Friday games are up 20% over last year, partly due to these games also counting as tournament games. The NBA's popularity is at its highest. There is basically nothing you can do to keep people away from the NBA, NFL, and college football. These are the 3 American sports.
This, or a form thereof, will absolutely go through. It will cause a readjustment of “required” sports at different universities. Olympic sports will disappear and Tier One Athletics will only consist of Football, Mens and Womens Basketball, Mens and Womens soccer, Volleyball and few else.
Which is why I say we are better off in the non-"pay" division and should just focus on the Pitt collective. Theoretically, you can "pay" the players more that way because you don't have to split it with the women sports.
For those of you with big money that want to help the football and basketball program -- don't endow a scholarship. Endow something to the collective for NIL.
Under this proposal, schools would be able to sign athletes to NIL deals.
I get the angst, I really do, but it was never fair that every entity made billions off of college football except the players. The pendulum has swung too far in the other direction, but something had to give.
I have to believe the NFL will be less likely to respect Sat for CF, given the money grab. They will want to protect their market from NFL lite.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Recruiting Article Four-star RB sets June official visit with Pitt
- Latest: HbgAreaPanther
-
OT: Ranking Pittsburgh coaches you would most like to see fired
- Latest: HbgAreaPanther
-
