Players Sharing Revenue

[eyekwah]

Dennis Dodd - CBS - sec-big-ten-developing-plan-to-share-revenue-with-players "The model being discussed by college sports' top conferences could go a long way toward settling outstanding lawsuits" .

The impact of revenue sharing will have a major impact on what institutions will be able to be competitive for the best players available. There would be a significant difference between what the Big Ten members would be able to pay versus what the Big XII would be able to pay. Even among members of the conference there could be differences. The NCAA organization will not be able to gain support for revenue sharing because its membership is too disparate under the new circumstances. It is why the two conferences mentioned will break away from the NCAA and act independently.

With revenue sharing will come players signing contracts. In those contracts will be terms and conditions limiting the ability to transfer willy-nilly. Maybe even non-compete clauses. You can bet that this is much further along than most of us realize. Expect this to gather more steam before the new TV contracts and playoff structure is in place.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

Been saying this for months. The only cure for the current status of major college football given NIL and transfer wild wild west is to pay the kids directly and have them under contract. Just like the NFL and every other professional sport out there. They will have difficulties if the conferences try and set a salary cap though. Need a union for that, but if these kids are old enough to get paid a million bucks, they

I want to see this move to two conferences of 24 teams each and leave the rest of them behind to form up with the Group of 5s for a second tier NC. Goodbye Iowa State. You will be left behind!!

 

[Fryowa]

With revenue sharing will come players signing contracts. In those contracts will be terms and conditions limiting the ability to transfer willy-nilly. Maybe even non-compete clauses. You can bet that this is much further along than most of us realize. Expect this to gather more steam before the new TV contracts and playoff structure is in place.

It's not going to be so simple.

I agree there's a possibility that contracts might be (part of) the future, but how it gets to that point is going to be hairy and I'm pretty sure that's why it hasn't been done yet.

It's going to get dicey because most athletes commit to play at XYZ University before they turn 18. A contract signed by a 17 year old ain't gonna be enforceable. Second, any contract is going to be advantageous to the university and detrimental to the student unless you call them employees or contractors, and at that point you have all sorts of labor law considerations and it's officially not "amateur" sports which is a joke anyway. You know why college athletes haven't been beating down the doors to sign contracts? Because it only benefits the school. Don't have a good relationship with your coach, don't like the school once you get there, your school brought in a portal prospect who's going to get all of your minutes and you have a better opportunity somewhere else? Tough shit, you signed a contract...

I'm sorry, but the NCAA did this to themselves by not allowing a single penny to go to a student athlete and now they're getting their just desserts. If schools or the NCAA are mad that they have to pay college athletes who make them hundreds of millions of dollars every year then they can shut their programs down. This is America, right? USC or Miami or Iowa or Oregon or whoever has every right to close their programs down because they don't believe in paying athletes. But guess what? They won't because even if they paid athletes directly they're still mega million dollar corporations after wages.

And regarding revenue sharing, is it right that Johnny Benchrider at Oklahoma makes the same amount of money for that Caleb Williams does? Nope. And if anyone out there disagrees, make me a relevant case as to why all players should be paid equally---something other than a fancied-up "Because I said so..."

 

[NorthKCHawk]

Fry, the NCAA screwed up by not seeing NIL and antitrust concerns coming. They were dumb. I agree. That is why they are being left behind. The NCAA will have no role in a two-super conference league.

And, it will mirror the NFL with the exception of making kids get an education of some type in order to play. There will be contracts. Good ones. It will get NIL collectives and unlimited transfers out of the system for the most part.

I feel like we have the same argument on here regarding NIL all the time, but again, I love that these kids will be getting paid given the revenue they are generating. They deserve it. But, there has to be some level of guardrails to make the sport legitimate.

Mirroring what the NFL does is the answer. Why is the NFL the most popular sport in America by 3 laps? Because they have rules designed to create parity and fairness. Every franchise can win if they ae run competently. Unlike CFB and MLB, you can't buy a championship in the NFL. If the NFL adopted the current college system, does anyone really think that Green Bay could compete with Dallas for buying players? Would Patrick Mahommes still be a Chief? Could Detroit even field a competitive team? No No No.

If two superconferences with rules is CFB's future. I am in.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

One of the most interesting things in sports will be seeing how this plays out over the next 5-10 years.

The current set-up is simply not sustainable, but alternatives will all be a sticky mess.

Assuming equal revenue sharing among conference members, some type of "salary cap" based upon a percentage of the revenue to me makes sense. Eliminate NIL and each team has an allotted amount of money to allocate to players. Each program decides how to divvy it up. If, say a QB is offered 2 million per season, said team will have less to spend on other positions, and so forth. That promotes some degree of parity and fairness, as with the NFL, but certainly isn't perfect.

The devil will be in the details. How do you contractually arrange this and what would be the contract term? As Fry pointed out, minors cannot legally be bound to a contract. If contracts are utilized, how much of the money is guaranteed and what kind of restrictions (if any) would apply to transferring and non-competes? How much would be guaranteed versus performance incentives? Will players still be able to independently generate revenue from private NIL ventures? That is one big ass can of worms there.

 

[CP87]

Been saying this for months. The only cure for the current status of major college football given NIL and transfer wild wild west is to pay the kids directly and have them under contract. Just like the NFL and every other professional sport out there. They will have difficulties if the conferences try and set a salary cap though. Need a union for that, but if these kids are old enough to get paid a million bucks, they

I want to see this move to two conferences of 24 teams each and leave the rest of them behind to form up with the Group of 5s for a second tier NC. Goodbye Iowa State. You will be left behind!!

Not a bad idea, but I am not super confident we make the cut, either. By modern era performance we get there easily, but we sure don't bring any major media markets. Unless we get credit for a chunk of Chicago?

 

[CP87]

Fry, the NCAA screwed up by not seeing NIL and antitrust concerns coming. They were dumb. I agree. That is why they are being left behind. The NCAA will have no role in a two-super conference league.

And, it will mirror the NFL with the exception of making kids get an education of some type in order to play. There will be contracts. Good ones. It will get NIL collectives and unlimited transfers out of the system for the most part.

I feel like we have the same argument on here regarding NIL all the time, but again, I love that these kids will be getting paid given the revenue they are generating. They deserve it. But, there has to be some level of guardrails to make the sport legitimate.

Mirroring what the NFL does is the answer. Why is the NFL the most popular sport in America by 3 laps? Because they have rules designed to create parity and fairness. Every franchise can win if they ae run competently. Unlike CFB and MLB, you can't buy a championship in the NFL. If the NFL adopted the current college system, does anyone really think that Green Bay could compete with Dallas for buying players? Would Patrick Mahommes still be a Chief? Could Detroit even field a competitive team? No No No.

If two superconferences with rules is CFB's future. I am in.

I don't know, it feels like the "education" part should fall away completely. These minor league teams would still have school affiliations, but I don't see why the players would be forced to attend class. The free education could be thrown in as part of the compensation package, but this marriage of school and sports has always been uneasy, I am not sure it needs to continue in this brave, new world we are envisioning (but maybe I am missing something).

 

[eyekwah]

I don't know, it feels like the "education" part should fall away completely. These minor league teams would still have school affiliations, but I don't see why the players would be forced to attend class. The free education could be thrown in as part of the compensation package, but this marriage of school and sports has always been uneasy, I am not sure it needs to continue in this brave, new world we are envisioning (but maybe I am missing something).

I can see colleges acting as sponsors of teams. The college provides the facilities in exchange for a portion of the revenues. The education component doesn't have to be provided by the college. It could be a JUCO that provides skill training in HVAC, Electricity, etc. Since most sports are seasonal, attending classes out of season would be more beneficial to the athlete.

 

[trj]

I don't know, it feels like the "education" part should fall away completely. These minor league teams would still have school affiliations, but I don't see why the players would be forced to attend class. The free education could be thrown in as part of the compensation package, but this marriage of school and sports has always been uneasy, I am not sure it needs to continue in this brave, new world we are envisioning (but maybe I am missing something).

Absolutely. When was the last time you heard someone was academically ineligible? You were probably in grade school and I was in high school when that actually happened.

 

[Seth53]

Talk-radio pundits have been touting an interesting revenue-sharing idea.

Regarding the bowl games, share the revenue with the players, whatever it might be.
Those looking to skip the bowl game, thus giving up the dough, might think twice.

 

[MikeyLikesIowa]

It's not going to be so simple.

I agree there's a possibility that contracts might be (part of) the future, but how it gets to that point is going to be hairy and I'm pretty sure that's why it hasn't been done yet.

It's going to get dicey because most athletes commit to play at XYZ University before they turn 18. A contract signed by a 17 year old ain't gonna be enforceable. Second, any contract is going to be advantageous to the university and detrimental to the student unless you call them employees or contractors, and at that point you have all sorts of labor law considerations and it's officially not "amateur" sports which is a joke anyway. You know why college athletes haven't been beating down the doors to sign contracts? Because it only benefits the school. Don't have a good relationship with your coach, don't like the school once you get there, your school brought in a portal prospect who's going to get all of your minutes and you have a better opportunity somewhere else? Tough shit, you signed a contract...

I'm sorry, but the NCAA did this to themselves by not allowing a single penny to go to a student athlete and now they're getting their just desserts. If schools or the NCAA are mad that they have to pay college athletes who make them hundreds of millions of dollars every year then they can shut their programs down. This is America, right? USC or Miami or Iowa or Oregon or whoever has every right to close their programs down because they don't believe in paying athletes. But guess what? They won't because even if they paid athletes directly they're still mega million dollar corporations after wages.

And regarding revenue sharing, is it right that Johnny Benchrider at Oklahoma makes the same amount of money for that Caleb Williams does? Nope. And if anyone out there disagrees, make me a relevant case as to why all players should be paid equally---something other than a fancied-up "Because I said so..."

Plenty of minors have inked deals with companies over the years (specifically, musicians and actors), so there must be a way around this. I'm not a lawyer, but I'd think a contract would be enforceable if a parent or legal guardian also signs with them.

As far as the revenue sharing goes, I actually think it does need to be set up in a non-discriminatory manner that doesn't favor anybody. It should be a fixed dollar amount or percentage that is periodically reviewed. If revenue isn't equally dispersed someone would then need to somehow calculate exactly what percentage of the revenue is the direct result of player X's presence. I don't think that's a can of worms anyone wants to open. Players won't have a reason to fight for more money if they all know going into it they're going to get the same amount.

Let's say they aren't all paid the same. My question to you is what scale is used to determine how much one is entitled to?

 

[Fryowa]

As far as the revenue sharing goes, I actually think it does need to be set up in a non-discriminatory manner that doesn't favor anybody. It should be a fixed dollar amount or percentage that is periodically reviewed.

My question is why?

Players are being paid for a service they perform. Why should a thousand yard rusher scoring 14 TDs be paid the same as a TE who sees 3 games? What reasoning on earth could there be for that? The reason people give is that it might help make college football more enjoyable for fans by encouraging talent equity between teams. Well, it isn't fans who are playing football, it's players. Why should we decide they can't make money commensurate to the talent they have? Let's say you were a really, really good mechanic and your employer wanted to make sure they could keep you around because Ron's A1 Auto across town had been poaching good mechanics lately. Let's also say your employer came to you and said, hey, @MikeyLikesIowa , we're going to bump your wage by 40% and give you a health insurance stipend because we value what you do here and we want you to stay.

What would be your thought if a bunch of randos you've never met and were never affected at all by your work said, "No, no, no, no...you're gonna get paid exactly the same as the part time oil change kid at Barry's Muffler Shop because we want to see competition between the mechanic shops in town."

Obviously that would be completely ridiculous. And yes, it is comparable. These kids are not amateurs anymore no matter how much anyone wants to say so. It's taxable income provided for a service rendered. Whether that makes them an employee or a contractor or a [what have you] doesn't really matter.

The other retort I hear is that it'll ruin college sports and no one will watch, thus leading to the end of college sports. Well, it's pretty apparent NIL and transfers haven't stopped people from buying tickets and hoodies and TV subscriptions. And if it does "ruin" sports, that will kill demand and the market for athletes will correct itself.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

I don't know, it feels like the "education" part should fall away completely. These minor league teams would still have school affiliations, but I don't see why the players would be forced to attend class. The free education could be thrown in as part of the compensation package, but this marriage of school and sports has always been uneasy, I am not sure it needs to continue in this brave, new world we are envisioning (but maybe I am missing something).

I understand what you are saying, and that has been discussed. Some have even suggested that the schools basically just farm out their football operations to a professional organization. Basically, sell the Iowa name and stadium to the equivalent of the Iowa Cubs. That is a bridge too far for me. Two reasons.

1. it just is.

2. These are still going to be 18-22 year old kids, most of whom will not make it into the NFL. I think requiring a minimum level of education for a few years is a wise move. Sometimes you have to look out for the best interests of your workforce.

 

[Fryowa]

1. it just is.

Thank you. Seriously.

I wish more people would admit this.

I can respect opinions. Everyone is different and that's what makes the world both interesting and infuriating at the same time. But when people use bullshit logic and make convoluted points to support a position they feel strongly about, just because they don't want to admit they simply do or don't want something to take place...I can't respect that. If someone doesn't want college athletes to be paid because they they don't want it to change the way football operates, own it and say it. I won't agree with them but I'll respect them a whole lot more than someone who makes up a bunch of hokey bullshit reasons.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

Talk-radio pundits have been touting an interesting revenue-sharing idea.

Regarding the bowl games, share the revenue with the players, whatever it might be.
Those looking to skip the bowl game, thus giving up the dough, might think twice.

While I don't think this could be the sole basis for comping players, I like it. Assuming bowls survive this epic wave that is coming. I have actually wondered why the bowls aren't already doing this under an NIL perspective. The bowls are not the NCAA or the schools. Why could they not create a million dollar pot and offer players varying amounts to play. Weight it heavily towards the star players that might sit out. 100k to play one game when you are 21? There would be a lot less opt outs and the bowls would have more juice.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

Thank you. Seriously.

I wish more people would admit this.

I can respect opinions. Everyone is different and that's what makes the world both interesting and infuriating at the same time. But when people use bullshit logic and make convoluted points to support a position they feel strongly about, just because they don't want to admit they simply do or don't want something to take place...I can't respect that. If someone doesn't want college athletes to be paid because they they don't want it to change the way football operates, own it and say it. I won't agree with them but I'll respect them a whole lot more than someone who makes up a bunch of hokey bullshit reasons.

Happy to oblige. LOL.

Seriously, I get your perspective. The NCAA has held down its workforce for decades and now the pendulum has far swung the other way and the players have a lot of power. Regulations and rules are not for everyone and there is something a bit compelling watching the food fight that is college football right now.

I do think in the long run there is a middle ground that is needed for the sustainability of the sport. It can still be a great sport with the product on the field remaining largely what we have grown up watching, while still putting appreciable money in the pockets of the kids on TV every Saturday. Those are not mutually exclusive. Random thoughts:

Transferring must be allowed, but limited. These are still kids who should be able to choose where they go to school, but with some limitations.

The kids should be paid by the schools. How much? I don't know. That will play out.

True NIL should be available so that stars like CC get their due, but collectives are a bad concept, IMHO. Replace collectives with direct payments by the schools that are subject to some level of control.

The sport should remain a college sport played by 18-24 year old young men who attend class at least marginally. Honestly, if the model moves to a true minor league football system manned by NFL B-League types, I am out. I don't watch the XFL and I won't watch it if it has a Hawkeye team in the mix either. What makes college sports great is the connection to the school that both the players and fans have. Don't lose that.

Get the NCAA completely out of college football. Go to a two-super-league format with 48 total teams and appoint a football czar with the resources to run the league like the billion dollar entity that it is.

 

[Chickenlounge]

Plenty of minors have inked deals with companies over the years (specifically, musicians and actors), so there must be a way around this. I'm not a lawyer, but I'd think a contract would be enforceable if a parent or legal guardian also signs with them.

How many of us "inked" deals with Columbia records as a minor to get our 12 cassette albums for $0.01 as long as you "sign up" and promise to buy more at regular price? I did a couple times.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

I don't know, it feels like the "education" part should fall away completely. These minor league teams would still have school affiliations, but I don't see why the players would be forced to attend class. The free education could be thrown in as part of the compensation package, but this marriage of school and sports has always been uneasy, I am not sure it needs to continue in this brave, new world we are envisioning (but maybe I am missing something).

The reason I don't think we'll see that or at least it won't happen fast is due to that like 95% of all athletes don't go pro with their sport. I'm probably lowballing that too. With that being the case most of those folks use the free education they get.

I see no difference in what you're suggesting with a compensation package for it being entailed yet being separate then how it is now. Other then just eligibility being tied to it. Does it matter to me as a fan if a kid is passing classes or not? Naw not anymore then if a kid gets along with his teammates or not so long as he's playing well.

I could see it all changing eventually since the system as we know it pretty much is all going to evolve too. Imagine having been a huge college sports fan 30 yrs ago and going into a coma and waking up this yr from it. Trying to explain all this would be kinda tough.

 

[Fryowa]

Happy to oblige. LOL.

Seriously, I get your perspective. The NCAA has held down its workforce for decades and now the pendulum has far swung the other way and the players have a lot of power. Regulations and rules are not for everyone and there is something a bit compelling watching the food fight that is college football right now.

I do think in the long run there is a middle ground that is needed for the sustainability of the sport. It can still be a great sport with the product on the field remaining largely what we have grown up watching, while still putting appreciable money in the pockets of the kids on TV every Saturday. Those are not mutually exclusive. Random thoughts:

Transferring must be allowed, but limited. These are still kids who should be able to choose where they go to school, but with some limitations.

The kids should be paid by the schools. How much? I don't know. That will play out.

True NIL should be available so that stars like CC get their due, but collectives are a bad concept, IMHO. Replace collectives with direct payments by the schools that are subject to some level of control.

The sport should remain a college sport played by 18-24 year old young men who attend class at least marginally. Honestly, if the model moves to a true minor league football system manned by NFL B-League types, I am out. I don't watch the XFL and I won't watch it if it has a Hawkeye team in the mix either. What makes college sports great is the connection to the school that both the players and fans have. Don't lose that.

Get the NCAA completely out of college football. Go to a two-super-league format with 48 total teams and appoint a football czar with the resources to run the league like the billion dollar entity that it is.

I fully admit that I personally don't like the changes happening to college football. Recruiting is almost impossible now for a school like Iowa and fans can't get interested in recruiting because there's no such thing as a commitment. I would love it if schools organized into super conferences like you said and mandated either a one transfer rule or a sit-a-year after your second transfer rule. Mandating equal pay is not something I'd be in favor of. A player's demand should determine their pay rate just like any other job.

I also know that even though I don't like the changes taking place, I'd be a hypocrite if I said they shouldn't be paid or that the portal shouldn't exist. None of the players, coaches, universities, or organizations affect me in any way materially so it isn't up to me to decide if or to what degree they're getting paid, nor whether they can transfer. What is up to me is to decide is whether I want to consume the product, and that's all I can and will do.

 

[CP87]

I understand what you are saying, and that has been discussed. Some have even suggested that the schools basically just farm out their football operations to a professional organization. Basically, sell the Iowa name and stadium to the equivalent of the Iowa Cubs. That is a bridge too far for me. Two reasons.

1. it just is.

2. These are still going to be 18-22 year old kids, most of whom will not make it into the NFL. I think requiring a minimum level of education for a few years is a wise move. Sometimes you have to look out for the best interests of your workforce.

To your second point, forcing people to do something just because it is in their best interest never seems to go over. Perhaps there is some way to incentivize the college education rather than just making it mandatory for eligibility in the league?

To your first point, I agree that there is something different about these players being your classmates (for student fans), or knowing they sit in the same classrooms that you once sat in (for alums). Knowing that they love your school, and that they are not mere employees of your school.

We probably would lose something. It just seems that forcing a marriage between a billion dollar sports industry and higher ed leads to lots of shady shit and a whole bunch of disingenuous concern about amateurism and sanctity of the sport, so maybe the tradeoff is worth it?