That's why I have said that if/when schools are made to pay all 85 and all the others in every sport that will likely be the end for many. Once again like the stadium topic everyone always wants to just talk of the revenue side of the ledger. The fact is most schools still lose money on athletics. Those big facilities are paid for by private donations not from the tv money. Those big salaries are also greatly enhanced by the fundraising arms of schools like LSU's TAF.
Also what is a potential stop to this is getting an ant- trust exemption.
SCOTUS puts kill shot to NCAA's defense of amateurism with NIL
BAYWAVE&Sophandros are SPINELESS COWARDS
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
-
- Riptide
- Posts: 2714
- Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:26 pm
- Status: Offline
Can you imagine the uproar and outrage if there was anything that led to a reduction of opportunities for minorities to get into college at no cost... or even for them to get in at all? The courts are not going to (should not) allow that to happen by doing anything that forces schools to drop athletics. A true "judge" would weigh the benefits and risks before demanding such a change. But maybe there are too few principled judges out there to guarantee it.
-
- Tsunami
- Posts: 7471
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:27 pm
- Status: Offline
Once the economic consequences of NIL and the SCOTUS ruling plays out, many schools may opt toward athletic alliances that agree to limit or eliminate any cash payments to athletes. They can't, and won't care to, limit any NIL income, but they can join conferences that bar direct payments to athletes, beyond a certain amount.
Tulane is the University of Louisiana
-
- Tsunami
- Posts: 7471
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:27 pm
- Status: Offline
All true, D. I used to keep track of attendance figures--and even several years ago, after the top 20 football factories, most P5 schools weren't pulling much live attendance. Many schools in the PAC 12, Big 12 and ACC averaged below 40K per game, with many games in the upper 20's to low 30's. And with the massive overdose of TV coverage these days, I don't see any way ESPN and others can possibly keep paying for contracts like they have in the past. Ultimately, each school will have to be compensated based on what kind of TV audience it attracts--furthering disproportionate revenue allocation--whether you're a P5 or G5 won't matter as much.DfromCT wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:12 am The Universities that have the ability to raise ticket prices and seat licenses are few and far between. Attendance is struggling across the board and fewer and fewer programs sell out regularly. LSU is a prime example, they've had a tough time selling out since they last expanded Tiger stadium. Even closer to home, Tulane has sold out Yulman once, opening day. We will hopefully repeat that against OU, but that may mean an absolute sea of crimson in our stadium. As has been discussed ad infinitum, there's too much competition for the recreational dollars and too many alternatives for new generations to choose from.
Tulane is the University of Louisiana
The people not going to games are watching on TV so yes the TV money will continue to go up.
BAYWAVE&Sophandros are SPINELESS COWARDS
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
NCAA average football attendance.. I used the 2019 figures so i don't wanna hear anything about c-19 krap
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_ ... e/2019.pdf
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_ ... e/2019.pdf
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
-
- Wild Pelican
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
- Location: Stamford, CT
- Status: Offline
If that were the case, ratings would go up as well, and they are not. TV money will not continue to grow, and I predict in the next couple of years we will see that the last round of contracts was a peak for the next decade or two. Maybe I'm wrong, and the competition to land the most watched games (and as much as I hate the P vs G environment, I have to admit that those are almost exclusively involving P5 teams) will counterbalance the lack of ratings growth.
Football won't die in my lifetime, but I don't think my grandchildren will see it be nearly as popular as it was when we were kids. It's on the decline across the country by just about any measure you can come up with.
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
Am I the only one thinking this won't change much of anything? The big schools with big revenue will now bid against each other for the same 4 and 5star players they are already getting. Once you get to a certain level players simply are not worth much or anything. If anything this would allow a non P5 school with a big pocket alum an opportunity to straight buy some 5 star players. But that would be an extremely rare situation. I would expect conferences to agree upon set expenditures and then the bigger schools in said conferences to cheat the same way they've been cheating. 3 star and below athletes simply won't have much of a market and will thus end up basically the same places they already are. Maybe if scholarships were increased some of those guys will go take their chances at big schools but many will be transferring back to places they can play shortly thereafter.
I do wonder a little bit how the few top flight academic schools for P5 football will view paying and/or bidding for players , i.e. -Notre Dame, Stanford, Michigan, Virginia, UC-Berkeley or Wisconsin?sader24 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:13 am Am I the only one thinking this won't change much of anything? The big schools with big revenue will now bid against each other for the same 4 and 5star players they are already getting. Once you get to a certain level players simply are not worth much or anything. If anything this would allow a non P5 school with a big pocket alum an opportunity to straight buy some 5 star players. But that would be an extremely rare situation. I would expect conferences to agree upon set expenditures and then the bigger schools in said conferences to cheat the same way they've been cheating. 3 star and below athletes simply won't have much of a market and will thus end up basically the same places they already are. Maybe if scholarships were increased some of those guys will go take their chances at big schools but many will be transferring back to places they can play shortly thereafter.
-
- Wild Pelican
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
- Location: Stamford, CT
- Status: Offline
But couple this ruling with the immediate play transfer rules and you've got the potential for yearly free agency. A player that has a huge year at a school that doesn't pay will go to a school that does. Players that were being paid but underperformed may see their stipends decrease and may transfer as a result of not getting paid coupled with not playing. We really won't know how this all shakes out for a couple at least a year, possibly a couple of years.sader24 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:13 am Am I the only one thinking this won't change much of anything? The big schools with big revenue will now bid against each other for the same 4 and 5star players they are already getting. Once you get to a certain level players simply are not worth much or anything. If anything this would allow a non P5 school with a big pocket alum an opportunity to straight buy some 5 star players. But that would be an extremely rare situation. I would expect conferences to agree upon set expenditures and then the bigger schools in said conferences to cheat the same way they've been cheating. 3 star and below athletes simply won't have much of a market and will thus end up basically the same places they already are. Maybe if scholarships were increased some of those guys will go take their chances at big schools but many will be transferring back to places they can play shortly thereafter.
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
+ 1, Justice Kavanugh is clearly ready to find "scholarship athletes" employees of the universty under the Sherman Antitrust Act, and it is hard to believe he can't find at least 4 more votes for his position. The Alston case is a "shot across the bow" to the NCAA to either "figure this thing out or we, the Supreme Court will." And, the liklihood of an NCAA anti-trust exemption, even if constitutional (questionable), for revenue sports now 75% minority is a very long shot, to say the least.DfromCT wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:17 amBut couple this ruling with the immediate play transfer rules and you've got the potential for yearly free agency. A player that has a huge year at a school that doesn't pay will go to a school that does. Players that were being paid but underperformed may see their stipends decrease and may transfer as a result of not getting paid coupled with not playing. We really won't know how this all shakes out for a couple at least a year, possibly a couple of years.sader24 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:13 am Am I the only one thinking this won't change much of anything? The big schools with big revenue will now bid against each other for the same 4 and 5star players they are already getting. Once you get to a certain level players simply are not worth much or anything. If anything this would allow a non P5 school with a big pocket alum an opportunity to straight buy some 5 star players. But that would be an extremely rare situation. I would expect conferences to agree upon set expenditures and then the bigger schools in said conferences to cheat the same way they've been cheating. 3 star and below athletes simply won't have much of a market and will thus end up basically the same places they already are. Maybe if scholarships were increased some of those guys will go take their chances at big schools but many will be transferring back to places they can play shortly thereafter.
The ratings are just fine and thus the contracts will continue upward. They may not make as big a leap as they have been but they will go up.DfromCT wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:12 amIf that were the case, ratings would go up as well, and they are not. TV money will not continue to grow, and I predict in the next couple of years we will see that the last round of contracts was a peak for the next decade or two. Maybe I'm wrong, and the competition to land the most watched games (and as much as I hate the P vs G environment, I have to admit that those are almost exclusively involving P5 teams) will counterbalance the lack of ratings growth.
Football won't die in my lifetime, but I don't think my grandchildren will see it be nearly as popular as it was when we were kids. It's on the decline across the country by just about any measure you can come up with.
BAYWAVE&Sophandros are SPINELESS COWARDS
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
-
- Tsunami
- Posts: 7471
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:27 pm
- Status: Offline
D, is the immediate play transfer rule a one year phenomena, or is it permanent?DfromCT wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:17 amBut couple this ruling with the immediate play transfer rules and you've got the potential for yearly free agency. A player that has a huge year at a school that doesn't pay will go to a school that does. Players that were being paid but underperformed may see their stipends decrease and may transfer as a result of not getting paid coupled with not playing. We really won't know how this all shakes out for a couple at least a year, possibly a couple of years.sader24 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:13 am Am I the only one thinking this won't change much of anything? The big schools with big revenue will now bid against each other for the same 4 and 5star players they are already getting. Once you get to a certain level players simply are not worth much or anything. If anything this would allow a non P5 school with a big pocket alum an opportunity to straight buy some 5 star players. But that would be an extremely rare situation. I would expect conferences to agree upon set expenditures and then the bigger schools in said conferences to cheat the same way they've been cheating. 3 star and below athletes simply won't have much of a market and will thus end up basically the same places they already are. Maybe if scholarships were increased some of those guys will go take their chances at big schools but many will be transferring back to places they can play shortly thereafter.
Tulane is the University of Louisiana
It's permanent.
BAYWAVE&Sophandros are SPINELESS COWARDS
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
-
- Tsunami
- Posts: 7471
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:27 pm
- Status: Offline
Big schools like OU and UT won't have to cheat, as they'll tell the Big 12 what if any rules may apply--anything else and its bye bye Big 12. And I doubt aTm, LSU, Bama and the like will show any self restraint, and its pretty safe to say that the SEC would be the last conference to institute any limits. It will be a real arms race between the football factories, and everyone else, like Tulane, will receded into a lower division of football where such spending will be limited by the conference. It will be amusing to see how the Vandy's, Kansas's, Wash St., etc try to keep up. And yes, players will transfer up or down based on what they're worth--kind of a collegiate version of major and minor leagues.sader24 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:13 am Am I the only one thinking this won't change much of anything? The big schools with big revenue will now bid against each other for the same 4 and 5star players they are already getting. Once you get to a certain level players simply are not worth much or anything. If anything this would allow a non P5 school with a big pocket alum an opportunity to straight buy some 5 star players. But that would be an extremely rare situation. I would expect conferences to agree upon set expenditures and then the bigger schools in said conferences to cheat the same way they've been cheating. 3 star and below athletes simply won't have much of a market and will thus end up basically the same places they already are. Maybe if scholarships were increased some of those guys will go take their chances at big schools but many will be transferring back to places they can play shortly thereafter.
Tulane is the University of Louisiana
-
- Swell
- Posts: 1097
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:34 am
- Status: Offline
Tulane and the like will be a part of a beyond-high school farm system. A recruiting supplement for the big conferences.
-
- Wild Pelican
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
- Location: Stamford, CT
- Status: Offline
Thanks. They were better than I thought. LSU was only a few thousand tickets from being sold out. Does anyone believe the Tulane 20K number? This year we better sell out the OU game.golfnut69 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:07 am NCAA average football attendance.. I used the 2019 figures so i don't wanna hear anything about c-19 krap
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_ ... e/2019.pdf
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
D...if memory serves, if you eliminate the 15 schools with the highest attendance Bama, Ohio St, ND, Michigan etc, the average per game is about 35,500...I think those numbers were calculated in 2017DfromCT wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 1:43 pmThanks. They were better than I thought. LSU was only a few thousand tickets from being sold out. Does anyone believe the Tulane 20K number? This year we better sell out the OU game.golfnut69 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:07 am NCAA average football attendance.. I used the 2019 figures so i don't wanna hear anything about c-19 krap
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_ ... e/2019.pdf
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
-
- Low Tide
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 10:36 am
- Status: Offline
The new transfer rules allowing all out transfers is making college sports worse not better.
Allowing money to flow to players will do even more damage IMO.
Athletes already get a cost of living check on top of scholarship. I believe Tulane gives $3000 cash. I think it’s a more than fair trade off. All school tuition paid for. All food and housing. $3000 cash each year. Free laptops. Free study abroad trip. No student loans to pay off. Just play the game you love.
Makes me sick that when people say those poor athletes are being taken advantage of.
Bulls&$/t
Allowing money to flow to players will do even more damage IMO.
Athletes already get a cost of living check on top of scholarship. I believe Tulane gives $3000 cash. I think it’s a more than fair trade off. All school tuition paid for. All food and housing. $3000 cash each year. Free laptops. Free study abroad trip. No student loans to pay off. Just play the game you love.
Makes me sick that when people say those poor athletes are being taken advantage of.
Bulls&$/t
-
- Tsunami
- Posts: 7471
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:27 pm
- Status: Offline
Not at all. It will take away Tulane’s preferred option of “getting by on the cheap”. For every school, it’s about to become “put up or shut up” time.
Tulane is the University of Louisiana
Teaser. WF on the SportsZone with Ed Friday night to discuss the payouts.
https://wgno.com/sports/how-will-tulane ... lie-fritz/
I hope we have some deep pocket boosters because that’s what it seems like where the money will come from.
I guess the Green Wave Club donors will fund this effort.
https://wgno.com/sports/how-will-tulane ... lie-fritz/
I hope we have some deep pocket boosters because that’s what it seems like where the money will come from.
I guess the Green Wave Club donors will fund this effort.
Tulane football head coach Willie Fritz stopped by WGNO and shared his thoughts.
“There’s a lot of things involved with it, with boosters, alumni,” Fritz told WGNO sports director Ed Daniels. “We are going to have some people outside the coaching staff, who are really going to help us with it at Tulane.”
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981