In all the conversations, what is always missing? The customer aka the fans. When you make all decisions based on what your spreadsheet says makes you the most money, you alienate your customers and one day you don't have any customers.

Unless you are compensated for it, NIL belongs to everyone; in and out of sports. The courts will also decide if athletes are students, employees, or both. Money is changing hands, there are expectations associated with that, etc. Sounds a lot like an employee to me. The schools and conferences via the NCAA have tried to control all of it; but when they started making big money, it became obvious that athletes would challenge the system. The NIL decision was a no brainer and I don't think the court rulings on any other aspect of this have really surprised anyone. If any school, public or private, is going to make a pile of money off of their athletes, students, or employees, those people are going to have to be compensated under some type of contractual arrangement. And since professors can make money (sometimes big money) on the side, as many do, it is going to be really hard for a school/court to say no to the students.

versus Professional. A college football athlete was an Amateur. An NFL football athlete was a Professional. They could therefore be compensated differently. A college athlete received an absolutely free college education. A professional athletes received the cash. That is the way it was decided legally for decades. The legal change is how amateurism is now viewed in regard to compensation. Amateurism now just appears to be legally disregarded or as an unfair designation. Why were those legal changes absolutely necessary? I think I have already given those reasons in comments not far below on this board. It is a political change. Nothing more.

schools were selling stuff they didn't own. It would be one thing if they were just breaking even where the scholarship was commensurate with the money being brought in. But when it went over the top profit-wise and the schools were explicitly selling names and images in addition to the product on the field (which the school owns), then it became theft.

made Illegal? That would have totally cured the problem you present. This was therefore just an invalid excuse to implement this detrimental course of legal actions. Under this same course of legal actions. What keeps high school football players or Little League baseball players from filing lawsuits for just compensation? I also see legal openings for people working at Walmart or Kroger. Why any limits, as long as profit is extreme compared to a compensatory wage paid? It is just ruinous unnecessary legal action that will eventually result in nearly empty football stadiums.

NCAA and its members got called out when they obviously made their mission more about the $$$...and the EA sports deal made it obvious that they were screwing/selling the athletes. Schools were acting as professional for-profit organizations while trying to maintain the notion that somehow the players were amateurs and thus could not be compensated, i.e., money for me, but not for thee; in fact, your money is my money. And the schools can still make as much as they can on the part that they own (look at the SEC and B1G TV contracts); they just can't restrict the athletes' earnings any more than they restrict other students (including those on academic scholarship). How is it that a student on academic scholarship can go out and make money doing whatever they want but a student on athletic scholarship can't? While controversial to many, this was a pretty simple issue really. And Alston was hardly political...9-0...it was obvious; it has always been obvious. The next issue is whether athletes are considered employees (whether what they receive are in fact compensatory wages) that have to both take classes and play sports as part of their employment contract. This could actually help regulate things a little more; but it will still be tricky as a number of university employees, and some professors in particular, make A LOT of outside money. But somehow this doesn't impede the schools or their mission and I don't think athletes as employees or otherwise getting paid would either. Finally, high schools and little league teams aren't making any money by selling stuff they don't own. And the WalMart example doesn't fly either...their employees could unionize and do exactly what you suggest already...there is no new opening. And unless WalMart employees have a non-compete clause, they can make whatever they want outside of WalMart anyway. I get it, people don't like change that could threaten something they've enjoyed forever. But the notion that this is somehow ruinous and there won't be college sports is like arguing that we have to keep organized crime around because it's popular.

That is the basic type violation those schools were guilty doing in "stealing" from the athletes as you put it. Didn't know there was stated law against that. If it was illegal? The school should have been Fined to the Extreme. That would have stopped those jerseys or whatever from being sold. That was the way to handle it. Not literally to open a Pandora's Box of possible corruption. Those athletes were provided an avenue to get a free education and hone their bodies to a highly skilled level where a few could advance into Pro Sports. That was enough. Opening up an avenue for agents & attorneys to collude with naive teenagers with millions of dollars tossed around was not the answer. That Transfer Portal is a horrendous concept as well. It is asinine to watch that play out over a season. All that NIL & Portal are just getting going. Hasn't really set in yet. Those coaches making $6 Million & $8 Million a year. It is like winning the lottery. People are going to tire of supporting a sport that is literally more corrupt than the NFL. That Transfer Portal makes college football more corrupt. If you think all this will fly long term. Go ahead believing that. Attendance for football games has already been dropping. Those coaches salaries probably being main reason for that. I have made a comment or two on Hog YouTube Boards vaguely criticizing Jerry Sexton and the quick doubling of the millions in dollars he gets Hog coaches when they have just a little initial success after being hired. I said the program is being ruined by that, the job is just about money. That last sentence is the crux of my comment. However those comments get soon removed. It is a NERVE. Even those moderators on those boards know it is a no no. You are not suppose to discuss Facts.

Used to be able to make the case that you initially did, that the value of the athletic scholarship was more than adequate compensation for the name on the back of a jersey. Harm, if any, was minuscule so no one cared and most athletes liked the attention. Then the NCAA started selling video game rights for millions; and (most problematically) at the same time continued to restrict what athletes could earn that other students had access to. We can; they can; but you can't. They tried to pretend they were maintaining an "amateur" or a "student athlete" model when it was obvious even to the casual observer that it was a farce. NCAA and its members...no one else...did this to themselves and we are where we are. ** Edited by daveinop at 3/27/2023, 6:51:25 PM

They clearly don’t want to give up B1G time football but if the players don’t go to class I think we’re out.

Who said that the athletes would not be students? I think some here have jumped to conclusions. Paying the athletes does not excuse them from being required to stay eligible in the classroom. Most are receiving cost of attendance stipends already. Getting a paycheck need not change the academic requirements.

...for football programs to become corporations who license the name, logo, uniform, etc... of the school they "represent" but be wholly separate from the school. Think Virginia Tech Hokies, LLC. They think it may especially happen when athletes become employees, where athletics will totally be divorced from the school, won't be students and will not attend class.

I spent much of my childhood in rural Alabama. I can see this "non-student" FB conference gaining perhaps a little support among a few fanbases. But most of the sentiment would be against it just because of the image it would cast upon Southern educational institutions. It's very much a pride issue.

Football Corporation that is.

legit education, and the health and welfare of the student-athletes. They should get out of the money business and the political messaging.

Try to resist the urge to gloat.

feeds into to not wanting to bend the knee for many. The day we bend the knee will be one of great sadness for a considerable portion of the fanbase. Personally, I will not be sad, but disappointed in what has occurred to make it happen. But the nauseating coal raking to come that will include half wit comments and misspelling our name Norte Dame will be one for the ages.

My issue with ND is that I think they could have thrown their weight around for the good of college football, but didn't do so. Maybe because it was for self interest. Maybe for love of the status quo. Or maybe they just didn't think of it. Not sure. But if USC and ND would have joined forces, they could have acted as a counter balance to P2 hegemony. You and I talked about this before. USC and ND could have formed a conference in their own image with ACC teams, Pac-12 teams and maybe some others. It would have been a national conference, and it could have been set up to basically give Notre Dame the national scheduling it commands. But now USC has gone to the Dark Side. And Notre Dame is now isolated. The only other near-bluebloods not in the clutches of the P2 are FSU, Clemson, Washington and maybe a waning Miami. You could throw everything that is left in college football outside of the P2 into one big conference, and it wouldn't match either of the P2. And in proportion, Notre Dame is looking smaller. My earliest recollection of college football was as a 7 or 8 year old watching USC on national TV back in the John McKay and Lynn Swann days of the 1970s. They were my first favorite team. And even after I became a Hokie, they were always my favorite of the bluebloods, and would be sure to watch their games on TV. Loved the whole schtick. Student Body Right, Traveler, the Song Girls, the Trojan Marching Band and "Tribute to Troy" and "Fight On", the uniforms, the Coliseum, etc. They were the team of the West. And all of their games felt like epic clashes. The UCLA game was the battle of LA. The Notre Dame game was the only true national rivalry, East vs. West. And the Rose Bowl, always seemed to be USC vs. Michigan or Ohio State in a Midwest vs. West granddaddy of them all on New Year's Day. But man, am I disappointed in them now. Yeah, I know the money was too hard to resist. And they felt like it was their only realistic option. But the Big Ten? Really? Say it ain't so. I guess I always thought that USC and ND each had deep enough pockets to be able to compete with the Big Ten and SEC. But I guess I was naïve or just incorrect. Well, at least on the USC side. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 3/25/2023, 12:03:49 PM

ND has always been a "get off my lawn, I want to do my own thing" school. It has never been one who had any desire to be a "conference leader". Hell, it took ND until 1995 to even join a conference for basketball. ND never even wanted to join a conference for anything. It was "forced" to do so. ND only put basketball in a conference when being independent simply didn't work any longer. See a similar pattern with football? It went 100 years with football and basketball being major independents, outside of any conference structure. Conference membership is still sort of an alien thing to ND. (Whether one wants to believe it or not, ND is a different animal than most other schools there) As I have repeatedly said, history matters. ND's history is entirely different than most conference schools. What it has wanted out of sports is too. So, to form its own conference? Where it would have to join for football ???? That would be like asking Virginia Tech to move its campus to West Virginia, something totally alien to and destructive to its identity, something approaching a horror to ask them to do. That never had any chance. None. The closest chance was the aborted talks of an Airplane Conference in 1959. It has never wanted to dominate a conference like, say, Texas. It just wanted to be a football independent and concentrated its energies solely on keeping it that way. Its the rest of the schools who went crazy with conference realignment, not ND. ** Edited by TerryD at 3/26/2023, 6:26:09 AM

I would prefer independence to the conglomerates we have now. I used to think the Pac-10 was the perfect football conference. Round robin play. and everyone had a rival. Plenty of quality. Then, they added Utah and Colorado. Which would be fine, if they played 11 conference games. WRT ND's independence, they have had the luxury to chose history. Most other schools couldn't do that even if they wanted to. No way an average program can put together a quality schedule that would qualify it for the CFP if undefeated. There are two things I reject or at least don't fully relate to. 1) People wanting to "force" Notre Dame to join a conference. And 2) Notre Dame's near iron-clad aversion to joining a conference. WRT #2, I get the desire for a national schedule. But I think this would best be done by creating a conference in its own image rather than expanding a tone of capital hoping that the system accommodates its independence.

"straightjacketing" and boring than being locked into a conference and being REQUIRED to play the same schools from the same conference 8 or 9 times a year, every year. Such a prospect is a big reason for ND's aversion. Such an experience is why ND football exited the ACC as fast as it could after the 2020 season. Also, we don't trust any conference to protect ND's best interests. We suspect the opposite, in fact. P.S. ND didn't choose its history. It tried mightily to get into the Big Ten multiple teams between 1895 and the early 1920's. Fielding Yost and Michigan chose ND's history by rejecting its admission and trying to get other Big Ten teams to boycott and blackball ND. ND had to play anyone, anywhere, taking on football giants like Carnegie Tech and Army on the road. That also led Rockne to cut the intersectional deal with Southern Cal in 1926. That barnstorming set ND's identity and its history. Decades later, the Big Ten very much wanted ND to join, but by then the die had been cast and independence had taken hold. ** Edited by TerryD at 3/26/2023, 7:38:30 PM

schedule. It is about identity. For Catholics, Notre Dame is a holy institution. And as my pastor teaches, at a basic level the definition of “holy” is “set apart” or more specifically “set apart by God” for his purpose.

My grandfather, my Dad, my Mom, my two brothers and a bunch of aunts, uncles and cousins will all roll over in their graves. ** Edited by TerryD at 3/26/2023, 6:22:28 PM

USC and ND would have been a powerful counterbalance. But the fact is the amount of money in the Big 2 is enough to even give us pause. We need a big NBC contract, that is a must. I hate where the game has gone, but we're as guilty as the next school. So now we deal with the changes and hope to adapt them to our liking, but the horse is out of the barn.

while I see that trend coming to fruition, would teams like Ohio State Michigan or PSU take the academic approach over paying athletes???. The reason I ask, I just saw the Ohio State football performance guy (trainer etc) makes 850,000 just himself. That is huge industry for ohio state and would have no problem paying for the athetes ... and with that would they be willing to depart LONG TERM relationships in the big ten. ??? Ohio st michigan are huge universities and huge budgets and in those schools the non athletic industry dwarfs. Athletics. Will be real interesting ** Edited by Mercury at 3/25/2023, 7:36:02 AM

hard against any changes that might threaten their investments. None of this would be happening if the media companies had not fed the beast to the point that it has grown beyond control. At this point, certain things cannot be taken back. Players are legally getting paid for performance Conferences have large media deals Schools have GOR deals to stay in conferences or pay/give up big money to leave Money is driving schools to move conferences (and not for competition, better travel, culture fit, or academics) I honestly don't know what will happen. But it is close to the point of needing either a court decision or legislation. The money has gotten too big to be left without any kind of governance (any Bank will tell you how much risk that creates for illegal activity). Kind of a different take on below, I would create splits within the conferences and have two tiers. Tier 1: All schools have football teams with scholarship limits and equal yearly revenue sharing across all athletes. NIL money put into a trust that can been accessed after a player leaves school. Tier 2: Semi-pro level taking the top players who don't make the NFL, or are not quite ready, and giving them access to unlimited and instant NIL money (or make them contract employees). Basically "all star" teams with 3-4 teams per conference in a mini-NFL model. I just made that random tier model up so I'm sure it is full of holes and many might hate it. There is no way to pull the BIG and SEC back down so the only real options are to change the game, break up the monopoly, or boost everyone else.

headed to the Dark Side. That's why they are alarmed. If you watched the grotesque speech by Kevin Warren at the media days last year, his message was clear: we are going to get ours, and to hell with everyone else (of course the sleezebag couched it in the language of equity. LOL). And that also meant that their athletes are going to make big coin as well. And when I say big coin, I mean beyond what the BigXII, ACC, Pac-12 and maybe even Notre Dame can keep up with. This is NOT the same Big Ten that Notre Dame could have joined 10 years or more ago. This is a different animal now. And if ND joins it down the road, it will be something ND never really wanted to be a part of. And the ACC and the B1G have next to nothing in common anymore. Remember the "Alliance"? It was all a ruse. Interestingly, the gullible ACC got stabbed in the back by the B1G and Notre Dame within months of one another. B1G for just blowing up the Alliance by poaching USC and UCLA. And Notre Dame for working for a 12-team playoff to suit themselves. Two massive Ls for the unwise ACC. So to answer your question, NO. I don't see the ACC being able to be a partner with the B1G in creating a new classification in college football. If anything, we have more in common with the BigXII now. But remember, the cool kids table said that the BigXII couldn't sit with us when we were forming the "Alliance." What a joke.

The Big12 has no business trying to get PAC schools. The PAC is a unique conference, as is the ACC with their own identity, The Big12 has theirs too, and I hope they don't try to something they are not. You are right about the Big10. as they have lost all pretense of being above the fray. They are the Fray. If the ACC is poached by either the BIG10 or SEC, maybe it would be a good time for the ACC, Big12, PAC, and G5 to sit down, and form our own alliance.

Yes, I think there will be a split in college sports. The courts have made it clear that the athletes are employees, and they must be paid. But I think there are multiple paths that could be followed, and not all schools or conferences will agree on which is best. We are in a very confusing period of realignment. Tensions are high because everyone wants to be in the best possible position to take advantage of the upcoming CFP reorganization. It will be the biggest college media deal ever and the entire process is a mystery. We don't even know who will be involved in the planning, which opens up the possibility that there could be multiple competing organizations (both conferences and media companies) trying to attract supporters. Greg Sankey has hinted at his idea that cooperation among the largest players will speed the process and draw the most payout. That he felt a need to float that message may mean that he does not see/feel a sense of unity from the other parties. Actually a cooperative front could produce less money than a partisan free-for-all, but it is definitely less risky. If we end up with two or more new major sectors of college sports, it would not necessarily be a bad thing. There would surely be an initial realignment for schools who think they belong elsewhere. Change is always resisted. But employee/athletes and NIL are huge disrupters and they are here and now. It should not be a surprise that every school and every conference has wants and needs to meet that others cannot conform to. I think it could be crazy. I think it could get ugly, (and maybe not). But it is something the colleges need to go through.

The football/basketball players would be getting salaries, not scholarships. If that is correct, the big winners would be the non rev male athletes who would have access to substantially more scholarship money.

Title IX only applies to an "education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance". If the players don't even have to be students anymore because they are employees, and if these big money schools have football programs that are completely separate financial entities, then I don't think Title IX should apply to them. ** Edited by tarheelblue at 3/24/2023, 3:00:37 PM

Title IX is NOT an athletic regulation; it covers all educational institutions that receive even $1 of federal funding. It includes athletics, academics, employment, housing, and extracurricular activities. Title IX was expanded in the late 80's to include all programs at an institution or department that receives federal sugar, even if that program is not the one being funded by the federal $$$$.

If Title IX doesn't require the women's basketball coach to be paid as much has the men's basketball coach, then logically it won't require the women's basketball players to be paid as much as the men's basketball players if they are all just employees. ** Edited by tarheelblue at 3/24/2023, 5:28:28 PM

It would be madness to calculate the relative value of each sport and try to keep it updated.

Why would football players want to unionize with field hockey and volleyball players? ** Edited by tarheelblue at 3/24/2023, 7:23:32 PM

I'm assuming these athletes will be required to be enrolled students. But the disparity between our points of view is an indicator that a split in inevitable.

They will all be in the same union. They will all have the same pay rate. That will keep the schools compliant with Title IX. The more valuable athletes in any sport will supplement their income through NIL. The employee/employer relationship will be as uncomplicated as possible. I think the schools would be wise to hire the athletes as contract workers through a third party designed for that purpose and shared by as many schools/conferences as possible.

to outside entities that will in fact own the teams and pay the players. Those entities would then enter into licensing and facitilites leasing agreements with the school. The players would not be subject to Title IX and the school would be paid through the licensing/leasing arrangements. The teams get to use the name VT Hokies and use the faciilities. The non-rev students would carry on as is but with a more equitible split of scholarship money between male and female student athletes.

I mean that literally, not figuratively. College coaches already must lovingly canjole their players instead of using the old discipline approach of just a few decades ago. That is like the NFL as well. I mean what is love, I see it between a man & woman, family and very dear friends. That does not include an athlete who is recently met and decades younger. Perhaps in very rare occasions, but not a whole team of young people the coach has fell in love with. It is damn ridiculous bordering on the absurd hearing some of those coaches talk that. I have heard that nonsense from the last three worthless Hog coaches. The players then obviously quit on those coaches during games. I guess that is all that love. Now we are suppose to pay three figure prices for tickets to see athletes just slightly beyond being punks & driving expensive sports cars often loaf around on a football field. The college football game is no more like the old days than a $8 pack of cigarettes. College football is being destroyed and empty stadiums will be the route in which that is done. I already hear attendance for college football games is way down.

but I have been assuming that the schools do not seek to divorce themselves from their teams. I know there is some sentiment for that situation, but I thought it was a small minority. This is a very interesting exercise. Lots of variables.

break off and form the new semi pro league. Don't forget, it's about the money right? Let the P2 form a semipro football league - the rest of us can then get back to playing college ball. If they separate and won't share their new found wealth in TV football money, why in the world would we allow those institutions to play for basketball, Baseball, and Olympic sport championships? let them play each other, as I'd rather watch VT play WSU for a national championship then a bunch of millionaire kids from Alabama and USC playing for money.

You even hear the college football players have formed into what could be termed a union and are planning lawsuits to get a direct cut from the huge amounts of money being generated by these football conferences. The graft & corruption possible in all that with kids in their late teens is unfathomable. I think it all relates to that woke culture that is being driven by a large political machine within this country. That is political but is relevant to note in getting to the root of all this. To truthfully answer your question. I actually think the B1G, PAC would be on board with all this more than the SEC & Big-12. Just due to the mindsets in those differing political regions. However this is a college thing. That culture I stated earlier is deeply embedded within colleges. I cannot go further without really getting political. However I think it is a college wide problem. The only split will be within those colleges which just cannot afford to pay their players those larger sums. This is all literally asinine as I alluded to in my first paragraph. It is meant to destroy the college football game.

I think if Big 10 would be more collaborative with the ACC and trust, I could see a confederation. easy... and let the Big 12 and and SEC go their own way. Its not right or wrong, but rather what does these institutions want to emphasize