@@tim81strachan Your not wrong these kids have agents telling them hey you may like it here but I can get you more money here or here just enter the portal
Its basically been a minor pro league for devades! Young adults just were getting paid under the table and fans wanted to be willfuly ignorant @tim81strachan
This sucks as a fan, but acting like this isn’t fair is silly. I sit on my couch and watch these guys play. The coaches and universities get millions upon millions of dollars, but for some reason we as fans draw the line at the players. Majority of these guys will not be playing pro football. Why are we anti them making money if there is someone willing to pay them, especially if it’s revenue share that they’re helping earn.
All of these schools are none profit. Yes the coaches make a ton of money, but the money the schools make goes into the facilities, staff, and most of all...funding a lot of other athletic programs. It used to be enough to get a college education, and room and board for free. But for those of you thinking "If the school makes money so should they" ... you really don't understand how it all works and has worked for many years.
@@jaybird9988 You hit the nail on the head. College football has been around for over 100 years and nobody had a problem with it up until now. People don’t understand that the money football generates goes towards other sports that don’t generate a lot of revenue. My question is if this applies to all college sports or just strictly football. This is ruining college football in my opinion.
@@jaybird9988 These schools way over spend on so they can stay a "Non-Profit". If you don't know that you really don't understand how it all works and has worked for many years. The school and other sports lack of popularity or revenue should not punish those who actually earn the revenue.
Now all the schools who were secretly paying athletes with cash, cars, etc., now find the advantage gone. The playing field is now equal particularly for large universities.
I'm all for the players being compensated and paying taxes on this income. My issue is the transfer portal and players essentially being free agents every year and shopping their services to the highest bidder. Complete turnover of rosters every year is making the game less appealing to fans. For me it was always fun to look ahead at a roster 1-2 years from now and think this team could be really good. Those days are over!!
If the universities are going to be paying players for play, I believe athletic scholarship money should be forfeited by the players and given to students that actually need it. Just my humble opinion.
To call this new system “college football” is an oxymoron. I don’t see where the “college” part fits in at all. It is professional minor league football plain and simple. Only it will be subsidized indirectly by tuition-paying families through student fees, university-backed loan guarantees for facilities improvements, etc. At a time of skyrocketing tuition and record-low acceptance rates hindering access for average people attempting to attend college for its main mission, education, it’s tone deaf to spend so much time and money on what is used to be considered an extracurricular activity. I understand time has moved on, but what’s the point of having college athletics without real college students on the teams. These are profit-making businesses in all but the accounting principles that they use. Instead of profits they have surpluses. It should either go to benefiting the institution with minimum required surpluses returned to the parent institution or it should be taxed. Full athletic scholarships should also be taxes as it is a form of compensation. It’s ridiculous the degree to which certain people are pandered to while others are expected to float the entire enterprise. Worse still when the institution has ironclad obligations to the players and coaches and zero reciprocity. This may sound naive but I don’t know any contractual arrangement where the burden of compliance falls solely on one side.
By the way, thaes players got free room and board and educations. Plus a platform to develop for professional leagues. Those kids were really exploited.
Three more things that I never hear mentioned. The first is that by taking in 100 to 150 kids whose primary motivation is playing pro football and giving them admission advantages that exceed even what legacies receive you are essentially taking away those spots from other more academically-inclined applicants. Schools will argue it is not a zero-sum game, but indeed it is unless they are willing to build more housing and infrastructure to accommodate larger class sizes. People may take issue with my assumption that regular applicants are more committed to education than revenue sport athletes but the graduation rates and academic progress rates do not lie. All the while the value of admission to high prestige institutions continues to rise versus less high-profile universities in terms of the lifetime earnings premiums that graduates of high profile institutions receive over their lower profile peers. And we are giving these spots not people who want to take advantage of the education but want to use it as a vehicle into professional sports while necessarily turning away others that would better benefit from the primary educational competency of the institution in favor of people who want to pursue an ancillary path. Which leads me to the second point that it is the NFL that should finance and provide the vocational training for people that want to take that journey. They certainly have lucrative enough revenue streams to support paying for their own developmental programs. Instead, it is the public that is asked to subsidize the NFL’s endeavors, just as they do when NFL teams want new stadiums, tax breaks, etc. And finally, this notion of exploitation is absurd given that the players and their families are making a conscious and considered choice to pursue this path knowing full-well in advance the low odds of success and risks involved. No one is forcing them and yet they pursue it anyway because the upside is so high. God bless them. They should pursue their dream and we should root everyone on to succeed. However, making a choice with low probability of success does not equate to exploitation. An alternative choice could be made to look toward other professional endeavors just like virtually every other regular student. There are many walk-ons who first had to earn their way into school on the basis of the same criteria as other applicants and then in addition, had to also earn a spot on the team rather than be guaranteed a spot as a recruit. And they do it solely for the honor of representing themselves, the program, and the school. There is often no media attention, NIL endorsements, or guaranteed windfalls for these kids, just the joy of having the opportunity to participate and compete. These kids are the true epitome of college athletes and they likely would never think to consider themselves as being exploited.
@randrothify Interesting affirmative action argument. Universities giving disadvantaged kids an opportunity to succeed in a non football career. I guess more money will be the opportunity to buy a business, etc. You are very bright so you understand that there are tradeoffs in business and in life. Someone is going to come out on the short end. Winners AND lisers.
@randrothify- I assume when you say the money will come from tuition paying families you are referring to the smaller conference schools who this system will not benefit. A school like UofM makes more of its major sports than it does from tuition. This is a school specific situation.
Why should there be any eligibility rules? If rules of any kind are not allowed, why rules about eligibility, since a player's sports has nothing to do with education going forward.
Because they don't want to totally destroy the product of college sports. Fans still expect the college athletes to be enrolled in their university, even if it's a 3 to 5 year paid apprenticeship program to learn professional sports and earn on-the-job training for it. As long as they receive an official certificate for their profession that is recognized by the State.
The university presidents would have to sign off on any kind of changes to eligibility rules and any move to disassociate athletics from the universities. That is not going to happen as so much of universities’ marketing efforts includes showcasing their athletics performances. Presidents will not want to let athletics become independent of their universities.
Speaking of eligibility, what if people who went to college but didn't play a sport sue that they should be able to play? What about suing that that eligibility clock is unfair, and you should be able to play college sports as long as you want?
@@ringostarrgazer2419 You are gonna see anything but a level playing field now. 85 scholarships per team. There were things you could and couldn't do. There were rules and guidelines. Yes he was right and you know he was. You can say, and I'm sure you do, oh he was paying players. yea, so was everybody else, your school too. This is nothing but a train wreck and anybody that can't see that is ignorant.
@@theknowitall4090 my point is that in the age of nil and the transfer portal not one team is going to hog all the talent..his job with stacked teams for a number of years was MUCH easier before those two were a thing
I wish we would just go back to the old conferences, for all sports but football. Similar to how ND plays in a conference except football. college athletics will be better off divorcing from football
@kcottone that's what more than 50% of thr broadcast is at this point. Why I just watch the highlights and not waste my time with hours and hours of ads on a Saturday.
Players will be getting a great 'salary' to play. BUT...NIL will still be used to buy players. I am happy for the players, but you are kidding yourself if you think that the schools with big bank NIL won't be buying players.
Joel the world of college football is surreal. You and I both remember what happened to the SMU program whose superstar HOF tailback was Eric Dickerson. Now athletic programs are doing the same thing SMU nearly got the death penalty for. SURREAL JOEL, SURREAL! Commentary would be appreciated. Love your show!
@@jeangriffith8017 The death penalty was not mean to abolish a program in perpetuity. Rather it dealt with perpetually cheating programs (like SMU) by forcing them to quit playing for a season or two,
The golden age of college football is over. Money has once again corrupted amateur sports and has taken over. No longer will sports teach teamwork, honor, loyalty and fortitude. The damage has already begun an is massive. One of the most storied conferences in college football, the Pacific Coast Conference will be gone next year and kids are quitting their teams and transferring when times are tough or there’s more money to be made. Many don’t realize what we’re losing and won’t until its gone. Sadly, that is the history of man. Greed wins, humanity loses.
I get both sides of the argument. The money has ruined the game but at the same time exploitation isn’t right either to me. The transfer portal is worse than NL because there’s continence changeover but then again my thought on it is if the players have better options at other universities, then they have the right to test the waters coaches have done that for decades. They would recruit players then leave for a more attractive job where we are in today’s college football. It’s basically semi pro football but it’s always been that. It’s just now the players are being rightfullyfinancially compensated, but things can be true at the same time. They deserve to be compensated, but at the same time the money has ruined the game the money has gotten in the way, but it’s just where we are now.
There was once a period of history in FB where the nfl was also referred to as "the postgraduate game." And players would stay in college because it paid better than pro ball. But it'd be hard to have a system with no eligibility requirements where teams couldn't openly cut players. Maybe put in place rules that allow a HS recruit 4 guaranteed years as a RFA with transfers subject to mutual agreement and there after they become UFAs where they can transfer by their own choice and be subject to being cut without consent.
Non revenue sports need to go back to Regional conferences. Maybe the Pac10 can return, but just in non revenue sports, and revenue sports is going to be the elite Big Ten & SEC as I see them dropping lower rankings teams. I see each conferences going to 16 teams for a 9 Conference team schedule. (3 rivals, 6 non rivals, flip non rivals next season)
So this while episode and what is happening in college football is what Jim Harbaugh was preaching for years. And because of that the attacks reached a fever pitch last year. It was never about a guy filming a teams sideline from 80 yards away on the opposite side of the field in the stands with a cell phone camera......it was about getting Harbaugh out of AA.
I never understood why the tuition years couldn't be accrued because to be honest, these kids even at like FCS schools are pressured to take the easiest possible degrees which may not help them find a career.
I'm sorry, but our congress isn't competent enough to deal with this issue. They should be, but they're not. I don't know exactly what the answer is, but Congress will only make things worse.
Congress will either give the football players 100% of the revenue from the TV contracts, ticket sales, and merchandise/gear, which would bankrupt the Athletic Departments, or they will give Anti-Trust exemptions to scrooge over all the athletes, from the revenue generating sports, pushing them to create their own Semi-Pro League that's completely separate from the universities.
This is all fine as long as publicly we cut the money going to these colleges and limit the tax money that can go to the sports organization. If you're curious Google the highest paid state employee in your state.
How do you balance that model, though? If Alabama gets companies X, Y, and Z and they can offer 150% more funding individually than the 2nd top donor/companies, they can have their companies offer specific players more money than anyone else. How do you avoid that? Maybe set a board that does audits on every single big NIL deal offered from every company? I don't know how that would even work or if it could. Whatever schools get the biggest backers will win the titles. Schools who don't, won't. Am I missing something?
Definitely in group 3 I played colleague football from 2016 - 2021. This is long overdue. I played for a G5 team and I think all of these moves have really hurt G5 school’s competitiveness and think these schools are being left out of important talks on how we can improve the game.
Excellent, excellent breakdown of NIL and how it will look moving forward after the latest NCAA and the Conferences agreement. Please do another segment explaining what the landscape looked like prior to this agreement and why Ed O'Bannon sued the NCAA and why student athletes were getting short changed due to no NIL.
The outrage over this is confusing. Players have been getting paid forever. Eric Dickerson drove a gold car almost 50 years ago. Families of players have been bribed to influence recruits. Money, houses, cars. Like Joel said, this is about getting it in the open. Pretending it's an amateur sport doesn't mean it is or ever was.
Will colleges and universities still pay tuition and board (athletic scholarships) to their players or will the colleges and universities stop paying out athletic scholarships and make the players pay their own tuition and board since they will basically become professional athletes? Why should the taxpayer subsidize athletic scholarships if the athletes are paid huge sums to play?
Same reason tax payers subsided athletic scholarships when the universities got to hoard all the revenue I guess. TBH I'd rather the players get theirs.
Supply and demand will ensure that highly coveted prospective students-athletes will not need to pay tuition. It’s no different than anything else. Moreover, scholarships will be a part of the compensation package if the contemplated House settlement terms become policy going forward.
I like klatts show. Watching him call games though he seems to not know some of the more advanced things he talks about. And often doubles down on it compounding the problem. I like the way he calls games. I would suggest watching some more film or getting with coaches. I think the disconnect with the audience comes when he tries to tie in things we are seeing to strategy or decision making when that is not the case.
Funny how 99.9% of sports media supports paying players. Reminds me of how 99.9% of celebrities lean far left. It's almost as if people in the spotlight deliberately adopt the positions that are the "safest", socially speaking. In other words, nobody in sports media is telling you how they really feel or what they really think. College football is NOT a business. There are no owners and there no shareholders. There are no rich old men earning profits off of the players work. This whole thing comes down to two issues: demographics and 2020's virtue signaling.
As a Washington State fan, a lot of this change has been frustrating especially seeing how schools have jumped ship for potential money. I hope that Wazzu wins out in the end versus uw but it’s up to the fans to give or invest in their universities and build them up. Particularly in WSU’s case, our fans have to step up and build if they want to continue to compete on a national basis. All programs need to realize that but ours more-so than others.
Unfortunately many states have now defined wat NIL actually is in state law. Unfortunately, it doesn't agree with what it was intended to be in those states by law.
Hi Mr Klatt what percentage will the Collective want from those players that they get NIL deals for, will they be doing it for free I don’t think so,will the player’s be allowed to have outside agents,will the players have to sign a contract.
I think everything that is not Big 10 and SEC football will be moved back to a regional conference model. The non-revenue sports are insanely expensive with the countrywide conferences we have today, and that drag is reduced when kids can just hop on the bus again to play their opponents. Even basketball, a more dispersed revenue sport will be easily regionalized, as it would make the tournament more interesting and meaningful. This would actually be a win for the student and alumni fans who can now not break the bank to go to an opponents venue. Also, in the seeking of profit, I don’t see the Big 10 and SEC getting much bigger. They will be a private league unto themselves as the only to play for whatever ESPN wants to call the future CFP. Meanwhile, all the other schools will intermittently fit in prime TV and streaming networks who don’t get SEC/Big 10 matchups, but mostly pull revenue from what they can find on their own streaming platforms. PAC-12 was indeed ahead of its time. But enough streamers collectively could aggregate games where everyone could see. But it’s just going to be a whole separate thing for the elites, everyone else will slide back a bit, but it might be even healthier for college sports
More fair is an improvement. That said, you’re never going to eradicate corruption and the bigger schools, particularly the less academically challenging ones, will always have a competitive advantage. As things stand, particularly with what amounts to unrestricted free agency with the portal, college football is a mess. The 12-team playoff is a bonus for the networks and the lawyers, but not for the fans. It doesn’t solve any problems and creates several. One example of each: 1). Problem not solved: How do we fairly select playoff teams? Last season, 1-loss Alabama supplants undefeated Florida State because they’re more talented (actually, let’s be honest, they’re “more marketable!”) Expanding the playoff merely makes it so 3-loss LSU should get in over 2-loss ACC Champion Duke for the same reason, i.e., it solves nothing. 2). Problem created. Individual regular season games are virtually meaningless, and rivalry games are no longer nearly as important. For example, if you’re Ryan Day and facing a scrappy Penn State team, and you have a lot of injured players, just sit them and take the loss so you can prepare for Michigan the next week. 1-loss doesn’t cost you anything and the rest for your injured starters may actually lengthen your inevitable playoff run. They need to force every team into one of 8 conferences. Conference champions get an automatic playoff bid. 4 at large berths can be decided by some sort of BCS algorithm of win/loss, schedule strength, points for/points against, etc. (Not perfect but better than arbitrary subjectivity). Also, limit transfers to 1/kid/degree (with exceptions for coaching changes, etc.) Also, caps on player compensation with larger caps on NIL based on program investment, i.e., the longer you stay with one program the higher your potential earnings.
To be fair, regular season games still matter a lot. Just like in pro sports, we’re never certain of where the “cut line” will be each season in terms of record/resume needed for a team to make the playoffs. Teams would be unwise to rest players in a mid-season game when they have no idea how the rest of the season will play out; that 1 game (win or loss) could be the difference between making the conference title game and not making it. Also, winning a conference title carries even more weight as a team could get a first round bye if they win a conference title. It’s true that there will continue to be a lot of subjectivity in the selection process for the playoff, but unfortunately I see that as unavoidable in college athletics with so many teams in Division 1 and very uneven scheduling from team to team.
@@joeegan5992 It will be interesting, for sure. I'm just wondering if the real issues will come at the lower seed spots...10-12, for example. Seems to me you'll have a lot of 2, maybe even 3 loss teams. That's where the real fighting might happen....maybe. We shall see.
The CFB traditionalist in me HATES this conference realignment stuff but I do agree with pay-for-play, though concerned about distribution. Been a CFB fan since the mid-70s & will remain so, despite all the changes...because I'm willing to adapt & LOVE the game!!
It means a third stringer on the women’s water polo team will bring a Title IX suit when she doesn’t get the same pay as the Heisman winning quarterback.
Anything about title 9 can be managed by simply a %. Revenue sharing is based on the percentage of revenue that a certain sport generates for the school. Dollar amounts aren’t equal, percentages can easily solve that.
Thank you Joel for dumbing this down and making it easier to understand. I hope Wazzu figures it out to stay relevant. At least uw has already felt some sting with scheduling while WSU gets mostly afternoon games. Go Cougs!!
18 year olds will go were the biggest check is. their will be like 20 teams who max their salary cap and use Collectives, the other teams won’t be able to compete. A new division should be made for the super rich teams.
This is a good and the correct thing to do. There’s so many people getting paid and profiting off CFB, many handsomely, except for the people actually doing the labor.
I think there needs to be a standardised pay out and roster limits. Not this stuff that Oregon and Ohio State are doing where they have 85 true scholarship players but 30 “walk-ons” that are being paid by “NIL” means. So they basically get 110-120 scholarship level players
So if they get paid are they now employees? What about academics? Scholarships? What about Eligibility? JK is on the money with Revenue vs Non Revenue sports having a governing body but once players have agents, a union, and a CBA they certainly won't be students. And yes all this will get sorted out but the long term effects may be that you have players playing "College" football for years and years. They may never matriculate to the NFL. So the QB at Alabama might just be there for a decade. Which is not out of the question NFL players go from around 22 to 26 or 27. College players will be able to go from 18 to 28 maybe longer. While I'm for paying players the long term consequences are so far beyond what people are thinking about it's amazing
Don't worry about the details citizen, just consume product! Fox Sports' #1 hype man just told you this settlement is only the "first domino to fall" and eventually the sport will be in a "better place" once unregulated capitalism is allowed to flourish out in the open. It'll all trickle down! If you can't trust a mouthpiece for one of the world's largest media conglomerates, who can you trust?
I love it all for the most part…. Hate that the conferences are changing like they do and will definitely miss OU & Texas in the Big 12 …BUT still love it
How does this impact via the various Power 5 conferences? Really enjoyed the break down for one who follows College football but not well versed in all the issues with NIL process. How does this impact programs like Michigan and Ohio state? Does this improve their ability to attract talent?
I can't imagine mens hockey doesn't bring in money. At least in the Midwest and northeast. Many games are televised and the national tournament is televised better than women's basketball.
In college, it doesn’t. I played SEC football. 8 years ago. We had the number one womens basketball team. Womens basketball at the time brought in more money than Northern/Midwest hockey if I had to guess. Our football team funded our mens and womens basketball team. We had the number one equestrian team as well. They wouldn’t have survived without a football team. Ticket sales play a huge factor. Hockey in college won’t have 80,000 tickets sold per game ya know
@@Peppy869 Yeah but there are ALOT mroe games no? Have to do total season ticket sales. Ill admit A collegiate hockey ticket sounds cheaper than a bama football game.
@Peppy869 it's not just about ticket sales, It's about tv contracts and rights. Hockey games in the Midwest and northeast are televised frequently and the tournament has television rights with ESPN. Also, basketball stadiums and hockey stadiums are roughly the same size, it's why they swap the floor out at certain stadiums. I would bet in the 2 regions I mentioned hockey tickets outsell women's basketball by a good margin. Again, I'm not comparing hockey to football, by any means, what I'm saying is that in those markets hockey generates revenue.
Dear reader, keep in mind that it is in Joel's interest to support his TV employers and keep the big money wheel turning. That means helping the rich P2 teams to keep getting richer, and the poorer teams, well--sorry you have no market like the P2 schools, go play in your lesser leagues and pretend you can be national champions. The P2 is going to make sure that will never happen. There might be a baby carrot hung out for Notre Dame to be included in a playoff scenario, but once they've joined the P2, watch the door shut to all outsiders. Joel, I think you know what's in store for the teams that are not in the P2. The remaining question to fans of teams that are not in the P2, what will you do? Will you watch the P2 playoffs? I certainly won't be paying money to watch it. That is a certainty.
If they don't get some protection, then the lawsuits will continue and the whole intercollegiate model collapses. It is the best option from a choice of not great options. -Joel
Notice how quiet those non revenue sports are being... they are just waiting... as soon as football and basketball players get big checks they are gonna come running with their hand out screaming, 'where mines?!' First thing they will say is equal pay for equal work! Susie the swimmer and Bobby the ping pong player work just as hard to achieve excellence as a quarterback!!! Gimme mines!!!!!
Too many people have been getting a free ride at the expense of college football players risking.their health playing a sport they love. The revenue football generates belongs to the players & everyone directly involved with college football. Smart folks & lawyers need to figure out how to make this happen, they also need to figure out how to get the football programs out from under the thumb of title 9. Females claim fhey dont need men, men are useless but they're quick to steal from the revenue the football programs generate. Figure out how to remove college football from title 9, perhaps figure out how football programs can donate a.portion of their revenue to their parent university to help fund non revenue sports.
This is a bad take. In theory this sounds nice but it's not reality. By this logic, being the number one cashier at Walmart and the number one CEO for a trillion dollar company should make the same amount because they worked just as hard to be at the peak of their position. The truth is the QB at Ohio State or Bama or Georgia is far more valuable than Susie the swimmer or Bobby the ping pong player
But the entire thing is about revenue sharing not pay to be an college athlete without revenue generated. College Football is generating 80 Millionen per season per Team in Big 10 and SEC i think from their new TV Deals alone. Like Klatt says in the video: "There should be an difference between revenue sports and non revenue sports." Sports leagues in the USA have CBAs and part of the CBAs are that the athletes get an% of the revenue. But when there is basically no revenue there is basically nothing to share with the athletes.
@SeanTheRuthless I concur with you 100%, but that's not going to stop them from complaining... look at the USA women's national team, they screamed loud enough, now they take money from men's soccer. I know it's not on the same level. I can still see law suits when there's millions on the line.
Factoring in Title IX and knowing what I know about the litigious nature of America, this will ultimately be the end of college football. I have no problem with the players receiving compensation but the balance between scholastic opportunity and capital outlays will force most universities to degrade their football programs due to forced, court ordered financial payments to non revenue sports. Joel is being overly optimistic about where this is going.
I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree. There is too much money in college football for it to go away, and too many interest groups that want to see it maintained. Simply put, College Football Money > Title 9 money. Plus it benefits the universities to have a two tier model as well, as sports are marketing for them, even if not revenue generating, so its likely the universities want to keep around non-revenue sports anyway.
Football and basketball will seperate from NCAA. That’s the direction this is ultimately going. College athletics cannot survive paying football and basketball players and not other sports.
If this pay for play is where we are at - the player Scholarship expense should be subtracted from the players pay - thus allowing other people, athlete or not, to get a scholarship to help pay their education.
In my mind, we're going to see a transition from student-athlete to semi-pro athletes. That is due to a few factors, some we're already seeing: 1) University degrees are less valued by corporations when hiring new employees 2) Tuition is reaching unreasonable levels creating an unreasonable amount of student loan debt (regardless of debt forgiveness) 3) We are already seeing a drop in University enrollment which will result in less revenue, and thus for sports programs to exist 4) AI continued advancements resulting in fewer jobs available as fewer employees are needed 5) Those factors will result in corporately sponsored University teams. #roadTo19
Raising funds, and tuition continues to go up for average person. How about not making tax payers pay off kid’s college debt and use the money instead of paying players, pay off kids debts?
What's to stop a player from getting $ from a local business? I'm against any rules that prevent a player and a business from signing any contact they feel is mutually beneficial. "guardrails" are just rules to benefit the school and exploit the players.
@@dimitri1515 This is what NIL is for. In years past players were not allowed to be in a Dr Pepper commercial, or get paid by any business for their name. Salary caps are fine, but I don't think any NFL player has a limit to how much money they can make thru endorsements.
@@Guythatsometimescomments Yes, but the unique problem is that those deals are still offered based on playing for the school. I'm just saying it all has to be addressed so that we can break away from only having six schools that can win championships.
@@dimitri1515 They do, and they are not necessary. We could have 100%, universal, free agency - and it would be better for players, but not owners. The only rules we need are specified within the UCC, the Uniform Commercial Code, governing all business contracts. Imagine telling lawyers, who and where they have to work, and how much a law firm can pay. No worries, lawyers would NEVER stand for such a thing.
So many poor comments by Joel here that make no sense to me. Why would it? "This will mean 2 schools can't pit a player against each other" Sure they can. "You get away from one school buying more players and evens out the budget." Huh? I never heard ANYTHING about capping the amount of money the schools can spend. No in addition to NIL which WILL NOT change...ie Toyota Ann arbor will still shell out x amount towards Michigan players, now Michigan can spend $100M on players while Texas Tech can only come up with 10M. If anything this UNLEVELS colleges, not the opposite. You're saying thing that is in direct opposite of what this will end up doing. The only thing you maybe got right was the NCAA is doing this to stop the lawsuits. My personal opinion..the players are getting paid with free college and room and board. The NCAA just opened up a can of worms when they agreed to NIL.
There are ways around this. Putting college athletes on the payroll and classifying them as university employees would be a foreseeable and tremendously costly mistake.
Each sport should pay the players depending on the revenue that sport generates... In no world should the football team take less because of a sport nobody watches really! And when I have said this in the past, and I could be wrong, its just my opinion, people tell me that the reason football makes more is because of the way its advertised better and more often then Volleyball or Lacrosse, to which I agree, it does get promoted more, but that's because of people caring more about football!! I don't care how much ya spend on advertising Volleyball or some other smaller sport, its not gonna bring in many more eyes then they already have, so therefore you should be paid judging by the eyes ya bring, and the revenue ya generate.
There are still a lot of legal questions that need to be answered, which no one seems to be asking or addressing, and even more problems that could happen because of this
I’m definitely a member of the second group, the only thing I would love to return is traditional conferences. Though it will be nice to see uw lose on a consistent basis to the B10 teams.
Just like in any sport, you should not be able to buy a championship. Sports requires a level playing field to be an overall popular event. Pro Baseball got ruined by not having a true salary cap. Now, if you are not cheering for a team that has the finances to dominate the market, it is not fun to watch. There are haves and total have nots. That is unwatchable for the have nots over time. College football will become just like it if money is the true king of winning and losing. Fans of the haves won't mind but fans of the have nots will go away in time.
Joel hits it on the head. This is a step in the right direction for NIL. This new era of college football whether you like it or not is here to stay. Schools and fans are either all in or all out.
Schools are either all in or all out in the top division and, more precisely, in the power conferences. But, there’s no reason to assume the same mentality or approach from the fans.
@@zplapplap a lot of fans don’t have that same approach. However, I believe it’s imperative to get behind this new era because it’s not going anywhere.
Truth is CFB has evolved constantly throughout its history. The old model was never going to withstand the financial growth experienced in the last ten years. -Joel
Yet again people think this money is going to come from the money already being made. Coaches, presidents and universities are not going to take pay cuts. All this is doing is make a fan spend more money
Actually, I dont think Title IX is going to be the issue here with uneven revenue share. Title IX guarantees equal educational opportunities. It does not guarantee that every 'employee' get paid the same. The next step isnt seperating the non-revenue sports, it is admitting they are student employees. You play a revenue sport, you will get paid more (a lot more). That is fine as long as the scholarships are equal.
Womens teams will start whining they arent getting paid equally. This is women we are talking about here. Irrational, petty, jealous, women. It wont be enough they are getting a paid education and getting to play the sport they love. Most modern women are never happy.
It does make me wonder about how much support FB will get from the college/HS administrations. Colleges almost always get substantial money donations from the athletic departments. Will this go away? Will "good will" be enough? Surely not for all. HS often have to deal with people thinking that sports cost too much. If those taxpayers now see a kid getting more $$$ than they make per year, they may not be so keen on supporting "revenue sports" when those revenues are to someone else.
I dont think this will completely play out how you expect. As a former athlete I am all for the athletes being able to make money, but now that you are opening the door for the funds to come directly from the university; it opens up a whole new world of headaches..... Now you have to designate are they considered employees of the University or are they contractors? How will them being an employee effective their scholarships? For revenue sharing sports do we even give scholarships? What about taxes? They are no longer considered student athletes, they are professionals; how do we tax them accordingly? What about their benefits package ie healthcare, retirement, etc. You have just added a whole bunch of people to the oversight of the human resources department. Now that you have all these employees donwe still count them towards academic standards?....... As a huge college football fan I am hoping for the best, but the whole picture could create a mess that are bad for the sport.
First of it had to happen in order for Conferences,Universities...not being sued to death. Off course there are plenty of questions to be answered but thats what happens if somebody ignores important topics for decades so it gets bigger and bigger. Atleast it gets finally addressed. I dont See why it shouldnt be possible in an System which already allows 50% college scholarships and 100% college scholarships to add 100% + college scholarships.
@@adrianbuck8772 I don't think this will solve conferences and universities getting "sued to death". This just opens the door for other types of OSHA and EEOC lawsuits..... Here's the thing. I'm for athletes getting paid. I just don't like the direction of how they are going to get paid. They will essentially become University employees, which means they are now state employees and opens these athletes up to a whole different world
I think this could have all been much easier. Joel also needs to stop saying this is all great for college football. It won’t be. First thing they should have done was make these kids sign contracts. 18 yr old kids sign contracts for the military all the time. Three year minimum contracts. Any action a kid does that inflicts monetary damages to the university can be recouped from future earnings. The education, stipends, food, medical, and bonuses for post season play would all be part of a benefits package. Collective bargaining mandatory every 4 years. NIL is controlled by the team you play for. Negotiated annually. But, kids signing contracts is the first priority. The big boys sign contracts. They wanna get paid like pros? Sign binding contracts to the schools you commit to.
Will athletes be employees and get worker’s compensation insurance if they get injured? That’s what the Schools are trying to avoid. Employees cost a lot more than subcontractors. Payroll taxes, etc
I believe schools are allowed to, and in some cases are, providing insurance (different type but same concept) to the players. Alabama was doing it for sure. They add it as an inducement they don't get in trouble for because the player could be the beneficiary of the policy without owning the policy.
Players already get insurance for any injury sustained while doing something for the program. There’s also general health insurance for athletes who don’t otherwise have it. That’s been a thing for years even at small schools like where I played (FCS)
Players already get insurance for any injury sustained while doing something for the program. There’s also general health insurance for athletes who don’t otherwise have it. That’s been a thing for years even at small schools like where I played (FCS)
Each sport could have its own individual collective the directly funds players of that sport. So if i wanna fund the mens lacross team i go to one of their collective events. Because maybe i done care about football. So a school could have 25 colletives each getting individually funded, but run by a school collective department that answers to the AD.
![NCAA’s near $3 billion settlement for athletes | What we know now [Full Interview]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-fexDKRHfqo/mqdefault.jpg)
How do you think college football will be changed going forward?
College football is ruined. What do you mean?
@@Jerahzzratings and viewership say otherwise
@@JerahzzWent to three games last year. The GameDay experience and product on the field were entirely unchanged.
RIP College Football.
It ain't good.
One things for certain…it’s never boring anymore in the off seasons!
The flaw in the NCAA's logic, is that their actually no need for the NCAA itself.
There has bee no need for the NCAA in CF for five decades. Its a corrupt organization.
If it's no NCAA college sports is now a pro sports
@@tim81strachan Your not wrong these kids have agents telling them hey you may like it here but I can get you more money here or here just enter the portal
Its basically been a minor pro league for devades! Young adults just were getting paid under the table and fans wanted to be willfuly ignorant @tim81strachan
Well, there is a need for it for the other sports that aren't Football and Basketball
This sucks as a fan, but acting like this isn’t fair is silly. I sit on my couch and watch these guys play. The coaches and universities get millions upon millions of dollars, but for some reason we as fans draw the line at the players. Majority of these guys will not be playing pro football. Why are we anti them making money if there is someone willing to pay them, especially if it’s revenue share that they’re helping earn.
The way I see it, there is no revenue without the players. This is long deserved.
All of these schools are none profit. Yes the coaches make a ton of money, but the money the schools make goes into the facilities, staff, and most of all...funding a lot of other athletic programs. It used to be enough to get a college education, and room and board for free. But for those of you thinking "If the school makes money so should they" ... you really don't understand how it all works and has worked for many years.
@@jaybird9988 You hit the nail on the head. College football has been around for over 100 years and nobody had a problem with it up until now. People don’t understand that the money football generates goes towards other sports that don’t generate a lot of revenue. My question is if this applies to all college sports or just strictly football. This is ruining college football in my opinion.
Yep.
@@jaybird9988 These schools way over spend on so they can stay a "Non-Profit". If you don't know that you really don't understand how it all works and has worked for many years. The school and other sports lack of popularity or revenue should not punish those who actually earn the revenue.
Now all the schools who were secretly paying athletes with cash, cars, etc., now find the advantage gone. The playing field is now equal particularly for large universities.
I'm all for the players being compensated and paying taxes on this income. My issue is the transfer portal and players essentially being free agents every year and shopping their services to the highest bidder. Complete turnover of rosters every year is making the game less appealing to fans. For me it was always fun to look ahead at a roster 1-2 years from now and think this team could be really good. Those days are over!!
If the universities are going to be paying players for play, I believe athletic scholarship money should be forfeited by the players and given to students that actually need it. Just my humble opinion.
To call this new system “college football” is an oxymoron. I don’t see where the “college” part fits in at all. It is professional minor league football plain and simple. Only it will be subsidized indirectly by tuition-paying families through student fees, university-backed loan guarantees for facilities improvements, etc. At a time of skyrocketing tuition and record-low acceptance rates hindering access for average people attempting to attend college for its main mission, education, it’s tone deaf to spend so much time and money on what is used to be considered an extracurricular activity. I understand time has moved on, but what’s the point of having college athletics without real college students on the teams. These are profit-making businesses in all but the accounting principles that they use. Instead of profits they have surpluses. It should either go to benefiting the institution with minimum required surpluses returned to the parent institution or it should be taxed. Full athletic scholarships should also be taxes as it is a form of compensation. It’s ridiculous the degree to which certain people are pandered to while others are expected to float the entire enterprise. Worse still when the institution has ironclad obligations to the players and coaches and zero reciprocity. This may sound naive but I don’t know any contractual arrangement where the burden of compliance falls solely on one side.
exactly. why do players need to go to school if employees?
By the way, thaes players got free room and board and educations. Plus a platform to develop for professional leagues. Those kids were really exploited.
Three more things that I never hear mentioned. The first is that by taking in 100 to 150 kids whose primary motivation is playing pro football and giving them admission advantages that exceed even what legacies receive you are essentially taking away those spots from other more academically-inclined applicants. Schools will argue it is not a zero-sum game, but indeed it is unless they are willing to build more housing and infrastructure to accommodate larger class sizes. People may take issue with my assumption that regular applicants are more committed to education than revenue sport athletes but the graduation rates and academic progress rates do not lie. All the while the value of admission to high prestige institutions continues to rise versus less high-profile universities in terms of the lifetime earnings premiums that graduates of high profile institutions receive over their lower profile peers. And we are giving these spots not people who want to take advantage of the education but want to use it as a vehicle into professional sports while necessarily turning away others that would better benefit from the primary educational competency of the institution in favor of people who want to pursue an ancillary path.
Which leads me to the second point that it is the NFL that should finance and provide the vocational training for people that want to take that journey. They certainly have lucrative enough revenue streams to support paying for their own developmental programs. Instead, it is the public that is asked to subsidize the NFL’s endeavors, just as they do when NFL teams want new stadiums, tax breaks, etc.
And finally, this notion of exploitation is absurd given that the players and their families are making a conscious and considered choice to pursue this path knowing full-well in advance the low odds of success and risks involved. No one is forcing them and yet they pursue it anyway because the upside is so high. God bless them. They should pursue their dream and we should root everyone on to succeed. However, making a choice with low probability of success does not equate to exploitation. An alternative choice could be made to look toward other professional endeavors just like virtually every other regular student. There are many walk-ons who first had to earn their way into school on the basis of the same criteria as other applicants and then in addition, had to also earn a spot on the team rather than be guaranteed a spot as a recruit. And they do it solely for the honor of representing themselves, the program, and the school. There is often no media attention, NIL endorsements, or guaranteed windfalls for these kids, just the joy of having the opportunity to participate and compete. These kids are the true epitome of college athletes and they likely would never think to consider themselves as being exploited.
@randrothify Interesting affirmative action argument. Universities giving disadvantaged kids an opportunity to succeed in a non football career. I guess more money will be the opportunity to buy a business, etc.
You are very bright so you understand that there are tradeoffs in business and in life. Someone is going to come out on the short end. Winners AND lisers.
@randrothify- I assume when you say the money will come from tuition paying families you are referring to the smaller conference schools who this system will not benefit. A school like UofM makes more of its major sports than it does from tuition. This is a school specific situation.
I think what this means is that the big schools will pay their players, and the smaller schools will continue to fall behind.
Why should there be any eligibility rules? If rules of any kind are not allowed, why rules about eligibility, since a player's sports has nothing to do with education going forward.
Because they don't want to totally destroy the product of college sports. Fans still expect the college athletes to be enrolled in their university, even if it's a 3 to 5 year paid apprenticeship program to learn professional sports and earn on-the-job training for it. As long as they receive an official certificate for their profession that is recognized by the State.
They did that in 30s when they had “ ringers”
@@roris5882 Paying for / getting a certificate that gets you a 1.6% chance of playing in the NFL makes little sense.
The university presidents would have to sign off on any kind of changes to eligibility rules and any move to disassociate athletics from the universities. That is not going to happen as so much of universities’ marketing efforts includes showcasing their athletics performances. Presidents will not want to let athletics become independent of their universities.
Speaking of eligibility, what if people who went to college but didn't play a sport sue that they should be able to play? What about suing that that eligibility clock is unfair, and you should be able to play college sports as long as you want?
The smartest person in all of this was Nick Saban. He got out before everything went upside down.
No doubt about it. He saw this coming for awhile, lol!
I just didn't want to coach in a level playing field..so he ran
@@ringostarrgazer2419 You are gonna see anything but a level playing field now. 85 scholarships per team. There were things you could and couldn't do. There were rules and guidelines. Yes he was right and you know he was. You can say, and I'm sure you do, oh he was paying players. yea, so was everybody else, your school too. This is nothing but a train wreck and anybody that can't see that is ignorant.
@@theknowitall4090 my point is that in the age of nil and the transfer portal not one team is going to hog all the talent..his job with stacked teams for a number of years was MUCH easier before those two were a thing
@@ringostarrgazer2419too bad Alabama will still be one of the highest paying schools.
You know nothing
I wish we would just go back to the old conferences, for all sports but football. Similar to how ND plays in a conference except football. college athletics will be better off divorcing from football
Just met you in Atlanta on that really late flight to Birmingham. Looking forward to hearing your interview from TTown!
I agree with Joel but the adaptation will affect the popularity of the sports.
Double edge sword.
Once the revenue sports are separated from non-revenue sports, can we please have our conferences back?
Best I can do is a super league owned and operated by Fox, ESPN, and NBC. Hope you like advertising.
@kcottone that's what more than 50% of thr broadcast is at this point. Why I just watch the highlights and not waste my time with hours and hours of ads on a Saturday.
Players will be getting a great 'salary' to play. BUT...NIL will still be used to buy players. I am happy for the players, but you are kidding yourself if you think that the schools with big bank NIL won't be buying players.
Joel the world of college football is surreal. You and I both remember what happened to the SMU program whose superstar HOF tailback was Eric Dickerson. Now athletic programs are doing the same thing SMU nearly got the death penalty for. SURREAL JOEL, SURREAL! Commentary would be appreciated. Love your show!
...things change... especially after over 30+ years. 😊
SMU did get the death penalty.
@@donwilson1307 by death penalty I referring to abolishing the program. They are still in business.
@@jeangriffith8017 The death penalty was not mean to abolish a program in perpetuity. Rather it dealt with perpetually cheating programs (like SMU) by forcing them to quit playing for a season or two,
I've been saying for 5 years college football is functionally a semi pro league. It needs to operate as such. I think this is a great step.
The golden age of college football is over. Money has once again corrupted amateur sports and has taken over. No longer will sports teach teamwork, honor, loyalty and fortitude. The damage has already begun an is massive. One of the most storied conferences in college football, the Pacific Coast Conference will be gone next year and kids are quitting their teams and transferring when times are tough or there’s more money to be made. Many don’t realize what we’re losing and won’t until its gone. Sadly, that is the history of man. Greed wins, humanity loses.
I get both sides of the argument. The money has ruined the game but at the same time exploitation isn’t right either to me. The transfer portal is worse than NL because there’s continence changeover but then again my thought on it is if the players have better options at other universities, then they have the right to test the waters coaches have done that for decades. They would recruit players then leave for a more attractive job where we are in today’s college football. It’s basically semi pro football but it’s always been that. It’s just now the players are being rightfullyfinancially compensated, but things can be true at the same time. They deserve to be compensated, but at the same time the money has ruined the game the money has gotten in the way, but it’s just where we are now.
Count me in Group 3 Joel Klatt,
Joel Klatt! 🎶
If the university pays the players directly, do they have to leave can a player just stay playing for the school?
There was once a period of history in FB where the nfl was also referred to as "the postgraduate game." And players would stay in college because it paid better than pro ball.
But it'd be hard to have a system with no eligibility requirements where teams couldn't openly cut players. Maybe put in place rules that allow a HS recruit 4 guaranteed years as a RFA with transfers subject to mutual agreement and there after they become UFAs where they can transfer by their own choice and be subject to being cut without consent.
Now are they "contracts"with term of years? High end players can't transfer each year to the highest bidder or coaching change?
Non revenue sports need to go back to Regional conferences. Maybe the Pac10 can return, but just in non revenue sports, and revenue sports is going to be the elite Big Ten & SEC as I see them dropping lower rankings teams.
I see each conferences going to 16 teams for a 9 Conference team schedule. (3 rivals, 6 non rivals, flip non rivals next season)
So this while episode and what is happening in college football is what Jim Harbaugh was preaching for years. And because of that the attacks reached a fever pitch last year. It was never about a guy filming a teams sideline from 80 yards away on the opposite side of the field in the stands with a cell phone camera......it was about getting Harbaugh out of AA.
As soon as I heard this news I came over here and looked for your video on it because I know you have great thoughts and just wanted to hear them!
I never understood why the tuition years couldn't be accrued because to be honest, these kids even at like FCS schools are pressured to take the easiest possible degrees which may not help them find a career.
I'm sorry, but our congress isn't competent enough to deal with this issue. They should be, but they're not. I don't know exactly what the answer is, but Congress will only make things worse.
Congress will either give the football players 100% of the revenue from the TV contracts, ticket sales, and merchandise/gear, which would bankrupt the Athletic Departments, or they will give Anti-Trust exemptions to scrooge over all the athletes, from the revenue generating sports, pushing them to create their own Semi-Pro League that's completely separate from the universities.
Congress? Wth ? No
I'm in the 3rd group!
This is all fine as long as publicly we cut the money going to these colleges and limit the tax money that can go to the sports organization. If you're curious Google the highest paid state employee in your state.
How do you balance that model, though? If Alabama gets companies X, Y, and Z and they can offer 150% more funding individually than the 2nd top donor/companies, they can have their companies offer specific players more money than anyone else. How do you avoid that? Maybe set a board that does audits on every single big NIL deal offered from every company? I don't know how that would even work or if it could. Whatever schools get the biggest backers will win the titles. Schools who don't, won't. Am I missing something?
Definitely in group 3 I played colleague football from 2016 - 2021. This is long overdue. I played for a G5 team and I think all of these moves have really hurt G5 school’s competitiveness and think these schools are being left out of important talks on how we can improve the game.
Amen
who cares? tough nuts
Definitely in that third group. Love what you’re doing with the show Joel!
Excellent, excellent breakdown of NIL and how it will look moving forward after the latest NCAA and the Conferences agreement. Please do another segment explaining what the landscape looked like prior to this agreement and why Ed O'Bannon sued the NCAA and why student athletes were getting short changed due to no NIL.
The outrage over this is confusing.
Players have been getting paid forever. Eric Dickerson drove a gold car almost 50 years ago.
Families of players have been bribed to influence recruits. Money, houses, cars.
Like Joel said, this is about getting it in the open. Pretending it's an amateur sport doesn't mean it is or ever was.
Will colleges and universities still pay tuition and board (athletic scholarships) to their players or will the colleges and universities stop paying out athletic scholarships and make the players pay their own tuition and board since they will basically become professional athletes? Why should the taxpayer subsidize athletic scholarships if the athletes are paid huge sums to play?
Same reason tax payers subsided athletic scholarships when the universities got to hoard all the revenue I guess. TBH I'd rather the players get theirs.
Supply and demand will ensure that highly coveted prospective students-athletes will not need to pay tuition. It’s no different than anything else. Moreover, scholarships will be a part of the compensation package if the contemplated House settlement terms become policy going forward.
The amount of state tax revenue universities receive has decreased as a percentage of revenue for decades.
I like klatts show. Watching him call games though he seems to not know some of the more advanced things he talks about. And often doubles down on it compounding the problem.
I like the way he calls games. I would suggest watching some more film or getting with coaches. I think the disconnect with the audience comes when he tries to tie in things we are seeing to strategy or decision making when that is not the case.
Funny how 99.9% of sports media supports paying players. Reminds me of how 99.9% of celebrities lean far left. It's almost as if people in the spotlight deliberately adopt the positions that are the "safest", socially speaking. In other words, nobody in sports media is telling you how they really feel or what they really think.
College football is NOT a business. There are no owners and there no shareholders. There are no rich old men earning profits off of the players work. This whole thing comes down to two issues: demographics and 2020's virtue signaling.
As a Washington State fan, a lot of this change has been frustrating especially seeing how schools have jumped ship for potential money. I hope that Wazzu wins out in the end versus uw but it’s up to the fans to give or invest in their universities and build them up. Particularly in WSU’s case, our fans have to step up and build if they want to continue to compete on a national basis. All programs need to realize that but ours more-so than others.
Love listening to you Joel Klatt! Huge Michigan fan! Go Blue!
Unfortunately many states have now defined wat NIL actually is in state law. Unfortunately, it doesn't agree with what it was intended to be in those states by law.
Thank you Joel! I now understand what this settlement is all about and what it really means in the big picture for college sports. 👍🏿👍🏿😎
Hi Mr Klatt what percentage will the Collective want from those players that they get NIL deals for, will they be doing it for free I don’t think so,will the player’s be allowed to have outside agents,will the players have to sign a contract.
I think everything that is not Big 10 and SEC football will be moved back to a regional conference model. The non-revenue sports are insanely expensive with the countrywide conferences we have today, and that drag is reduced when kids can just hop on the bus again to play their opponents. Even basketball, a more dispersed revenue sport will be easily regionalized, as it would make the tournament more interesting and meaningful. This would actually be a win for the student and alumni fans who can now not break the bank to go to an opponents venue. Also, in the seeking of profit, I don’t see the Big 10 and SEC getting much bigger. They will be a private league unto themselves as the only to play for whatever ESPN wants to call the future CFP. Meanwhile, all the other schools will intermittently fit in prime TV and streaming networks who don’t get SEC/Big 10 matchups, but mostly pull revenue from what they can find on their own streaming platforms. PAC-12 was indeed ahead of its time. But enough streamers collectively could aggregate games where everyone could see. But it’s just going to be a whole separate thing for the elites, everyone else will slide back a bit, but it might be even healthier for college sports
So possibly contracts, transfers after you fulfill your contract?🤷🏽
More fair is an improvement.
That said, you’re never going to eradicate corruption and the bigger schools, particularly the less academically challenging ones, will always have a competitive advantage.
As things stand, particularly with what amounts to unrestricted free agency with the portal, college football is a mess. The 12-team playoff is a bonus for the networks and the lawyers, but not for the fans. It doesn’t solve any problems and creates several. One example of each:
1). Problem not solved: How do we fairly select playoff teams? Last season, 1-loss Alabama supplants undefeated Florida State because they’re more talented (actually, let’s be honest, they’re “more marketable!”) Expanding the playoff merely makes it so 3-loss LSU should get in over 2-loss ACC Champion Duke for the same reason, i.e., it solves nothing.
2). Problem created. Individual regular season games are virtually meaningless, and rivalry games are no longer nearly as important.
For example, if you’re Ryan Day and facing a scrappy Penn State team, and you have a lot of injured players, just sit them and take the loss so you can prepare for Michigan the next week. 1-loss doesn’t cost you anything and the rest for your injured starters may actually lengthen your inevitable playoff run.
They need to force every team into one of 8 conferences. Conference champions get an automatic playoff bid. 4 at large berths can be decided by some sort of BCS algorithm of win/loss, schedule strength, points for/points against, etc. (Not perfect but better than arbitrary subjectivity).
Also, limit transfers to 1/kid/degree (with exceptions for coaching changes, etc.)
Also, caps on player compensation with larger caps on NIL based on program investment, i.e., the longer you stay with one program the higher your potential earnings.
Well said, DeshCanter...well thought out post.
To be fair, regular season games still matter a lot. Just like in pro sports, we’re never certain of where the “cut line” will be each season in terms of record/resume needed for a team to make the playoffs. Teams would be unwise to rest players in a mid-season game when they have no idea how the rest of the season will play out; that 1 game (win or loss) could be the difference between making the conference title game and not making it. Also, winning a conference title carries even more weight as a team could get a first round bye if they win a conference title.
It’s true that there will continue to be a lot of subjectivity in the selection process for the playoff, but unfortunately I see that as unavoidable in college athletics with so many teams in Division 1 and very uneven scheduling from team to team.
@@joeegan5992 It will be interesting, for sure. I'm just wondering if the real issues will come at the lower seed spots...10-12, for example. Seems to me you'll have a lot of 2, maybe even 3 loss teams. That's where the real fighting might happen....maybe. We shall see.
When are we going to start paying high school and junior high players above the table?
Some states’ high school associations already allow NIL
Why isn't the Coaching salary placed on a cap?
The CFB traditionalist in me HATES this conference realignment stuff but I do agree with pay-for-play, though concerned about distribution.
Been a CFB fan since the mid-70s & will remain so, despite all the changes...because I'm willing to adapt & LOVE the game!!
It means a third stringer on the women’s water polo team will bring a Title IX suit when she doesn’t get the same pay as the Heisman winning quarterback.
It puts a lot above board......gone are the days of players' parents being paid under the table to recruit a player......etc...
It will put too much pressure on players just out of high school. Once there these players will forget about their education
As always he brings out the truth as we know it
Anything about title 9 can be managed by simply a %. Revenue sharing is based on the percentage of revenue that a certain sport generates for the school. Dollar amounts aren’t equal, percentages can easily solve that.
FINANCIAL LITERACY IS PARAMOUNT (DURING REVENUE SHARING) FOR COLLEGE STUDENT ATHLETES!!!
Thank you Joel for dumbing this down and making it easier to understand. I hope Wazzu figures it out to stay relevant. At least uw has already felt some sting with scheduling while WSU gets mostly afternoon games. Go Cougs!!
18 year olds will go were the biggest check is. their will be like 20 teams who max their salary cap and use Collectives, the other teams won’t be able to compete. A new division should be made for the super rich teams.
players should have to sign contracts to the schools. Scholarships and everything else should come out of the cap.
This is a good and the correct thing to do. There’s so many people getting paid and profiting off CFB, many handsomely, except for the people actually doing the labor.
I think there needs to be a standardised pay out and roster limits. Not this stuff that Oregon and Ohio State are doing where they have 85 true scholarship players but 30 “walk-ons” that are being paid by “NIL” means. So they basically get 110-120 scholarship level players
Thanks for the information on “pay for play” and NIL 😊😊😊
So if they get paid are they now employees? What about academics? Scholarships? What about Eligibility? JK is on the money with Revenue vs Non Revenue sports having a governing body but once players have agents, a union, and a CBA they certainly won't be students. And yes all this will get sorted out but the long term effects may be that you have players playing "College" football for years and years. They may never matriculate to the NFL. So the QB at Alabama might just be there for a decade. Which is not out of the question NFL players go from around 22 to 26 or 27. College players will be able to go from 18 to 28 maybe longer. While I'm for paying players the long term consequences are so far beyond what people are thinking about it's amazing
Don't worry about the details citizen, just consume product! Fox Sports' #1 hype man just told you this settlement is only the "first domino to fall" and eventually the sport will be in a "better place" once unregulated capitalism is allowed to flourish out in the open. It'll all trickle down! If you can't trust a mouthpiece for one of the world's largest media conglomerates, who can you trust?
I love it all for the most part…. Hate that the conferences are changing like they do and will definitely miss OU & Texas in the Big 12 …BUT still love it
How does this impact via the various Power 5 conferences? Really enjoyed the break down for one who follows College football but not well versed in all the issues with NIL process. How does this impact programs like Michigan and Ohio state? Does this improve their ability to attract talent?
I can't imagine mens hockey doesn't bring in money. At least in the Midwest and northeast. Many games are televised and the national tournament is televised better than women's basketball.
In college, it doesn’t. I played SEC football. 8 years ago. We had the number one womens basketball team. Womens basketball at the time brought in more money than Northern/Midwest hockey if I had to guess. Our football team funded our mens and womens basketball team. We had the number one equestrian team as well. They wouldn’t have survived without a football team. Ticket sales play a huge factor. Hockey in college won’t have 80,000 tickets sold per game ya know
@@Peppy869 Yeah but there are ALOT mroe games no? Have to do total season ticket sales. Ill admit A collegiate hockey ticket sounds cheaper than a bama football game.
@Peppy869 it's not just about ticket sales, It's about tv contracts and rights. Hockey games in the Midwest and northeast are televised frequently and the tournament has television rights with ESPN. Also, basketball stadiums and hockey stadiums are roughly the same size, it's why they swap the floor out at certain stadiums. I would bet in the 2 regions I mentioned hockey tickets outsell women's basketball by a good margin. Again, I'm not comparing hockey to football, by any means, what I'm saying is that in those markets hockey generates revenue.
@@Peppy869 I didnt know the SEC even had Hockey teams, just like Wrestling. I thought your schools spent all that money on football.
Dear reader, keep in mind that it is in Joel's interest to support his TV employers and keep the big money wheel turning. That means helping the rich P2 teams to keep getting richer, and the poorer teams, well--sorry you have no market like the P2 schools, go play in your lesser leagues and pretend you can be national champions. The P2 is going to make sure that will never happen. There might be a baby carrot hung out for Notre Dame to be included in a playoff scenario, but once they've joined the P2, watch the door shut to all outsiders.
Joel, I think you know what's in store for the teams that are not in the P2. The remaining question to fans of teams that are not in the P2, what will you do? Will you watch the P2 playoffs? I certainly won't be paying money to watch it. That is a certainty.
I really like your take on this and agree with you
Nice recap, Joel. Agree that anti-trust element is key. Thanks and Go Buffs!
If they don't get some protection, then the lawsuits will continue and the whole intercollegiate model collapses. It is the best option from a choice of not great options. -Joel
Notice how quiet those non revenue sports are being... they are just waiting... as soon as football and basketball players get big checks they are gonna come running with their hand out screaming, 'where mines?!' First thing they will say is equal pay for equal work! Susie the swimmer and Bobby the ping pong player work just as hard to achieve excellence as a quarterback!!! Gimme mines!!!!!
Too many people have been getting a free ride at the expense of college football players risking.their health playing a sport they love. The revenue football generates belongs to the players & everyone directly involved with college football.
Smart folks & lawyers need to figure out how to make this happen, they also need to figure out how to get the football programs out from under the thumb of title 9.
Females claim fhey dont need men, men are useless but they're quick to steal from the revenue the football programs generate.
Figure out how to remove college football from title 9, perhaps figure out how football programs can donate a.portion of their revenue to their parent university to help fund non revenue sports.
This is a bad take. In theory this sounds nice but it's not reality. By this logic, being the number one cashier at Walmart and the number one CEO for a trillion dollar company should make the same amount because they worked just as hard to be at the peak of their position.
The truth is the QB at Ohio State or Bama or Georgia is far more valuable than Susie the swimmer or Bobby the ping pong player
But the entire thing is about revenue sharing not pay to be an college athlete without revenue generated. College Football is generating 80 Millionen per season per Team in Big 10 and SEC i think from their new TV Deals alone.
Like Klatt says in the video: "There should be an difference between revenue sports and non revenue sports."
Sports leagues in the USA have CBAs and part of the CBAs are that the athletes get an% of the revenue. But when there is basically no revenue there is basically nothing to share with the athletes.
@SeanTheRuthless I concur with you 100%, but that's not going to stop them from complaining... look at the USA women's national team, they screamed loud enough, now they take money from men's soccer. I know it's not on the same level. I can still see law suits when there's millions on the line.
I stand with the workers (players), not the executives (coaches and department heads)!!
Factoring in Title IX and knowing what I know about the litigious nature of America, this will ultimately be the end of college football. I have no problem with the players receiving compensation but the balance between scholastic opportunity and capital outlays will force most universities to degrade their football programs due to forced, court ordered financial payments to non revenue sports. Joel is being overly optimistic about where this is going.
I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree. There is too much money in college football for it to go away, and too many interest groups that want to see it maintained. Simply put, College Football Money > Title 9 money. Plus it benefits the universities to have a two tier model as well, as sports are marketing for them, even if not revenue generating, so its likely the universities want to keep around non-revenue sports anyway.
The fact they’re allowing males to compete in female sports tells me they don’t care too much about Title 9
Football and basketball will seperate from NCAA. That’s the direction this is ultimately going. College athletics cannot survive paying football and basketball players and not other sports.
If this pay for play is where we are at - the player Scholarship expense should be subtracted from the players pay - thus allowing other people, athlete or not, to get a scholarship to help pay their education.
RIP College Football... It's been 30+ years. I'm gonna miss you!!
Would you prefer the people who generate the billions of dollars in revenue not get paid?
You will not be missed
@@arodri313 Your mother does.
Players deserve it
Troy University football got three alternatives uniforms and helmets
In my mind, we're going to see a transition from student-athlete to semi-pro athletes. That is due to a few factors, some we're already seeing:
1) University degrees are less valued by corporations when hiring new employees
2) Tuition is reaching unreasonable levels creating an unreasonable amount of student loan debt (regardless of debt forgiveness)
3) We are already seeing a drop in University enrollment which will result in less revenue, and thus for sports programs to exist
4) AI continued advancements resulting in fewer jobs available as fewer employees are needed
5) Those factors will result in corporately sponsored University teams.
#roadTo19
Raising funds, and tuition continues to go up for average person. How about not making tax payers pay off kid’s college debt and use the money instead of paying players, pay off kids debts?
Great breakdown Joel 😊😊
Is the agreement only for football and basketball or could University of North Dakota hockey team pay some of their athletes?
What's to stop a player from getting $ from a local business? I'm against any rules that prevent a player and a business from signing any contact they feel is mutually beneficial. "guardrails" are just rules to benefit the school and exploit the players.
Even the NFL has salary caps and revenue sharing. Guardails or rules are always necessary.
@@dimitri1515 This is what NIL is for. In years past players were not allowed to be in a Dr Pepper commercial, or get paid by any business for their name. Salary caps are fine, but I don't think any NFL player has a limit to how much money they can make thru endorsements.
@@Guythatsometimescomments Yes, but the unique problem is that those deals are still offered based on playing for the school. I'm just saying it all has to be addressed so that we can break away from only having six schools that can win championships.
@@dimitri1515 I'd agree with that. Competitive landscape always needs to be in check. I'm certain I don't have the answer for how lol
@@dimitri1515 They do, and they are not necessary. We could have 100%, universal, free agency - and it would be better for players, but not owners. The only rules we need are specified within the UCC, the Uniform Commercial Code, governing all business contracts. Imagine telling lawyers, who and where they have to work, and how much a law firm can pay. No worries, lawyers would NEVER stand for such a thing.
So many poor comments by Joel here that make no sense to me. Why would it? "This will mean 2 schools can't pit a player against each other" Sure they can. "You get away from one school buying more players and evens out the budget." Huh? I never heard ANYTHING about capping the amount of money the schools can spend. No in addition to NIL which WILL NOT change...ie Toyota Ann arbor will still shell out x amount towards Michigan players, now Michigan can spend $100M on players while Texas Tech can only come up with 10M. If anything this UNLEVELS colleges, not the opposite. You're saying thing that is in direct opposite of what this will end up doing. The only thing you maybe got right was the NCAA is doing this to stop the lawsuits.
My personal opinion..the players are getting paid with free college and room and board. The NCAA just opened up a can of worms when they agreed to NIL.
How are states going to contribute money to schools, when schools pay players millions of dollars?
Anyone else starting to realize many of these kids will be on state payrolls lmao
There are ways around this. Putting college athletes on the payroll and classifying them as university employees would be a foreseeable and tremendously costly mistake.
Each sport should pay the players depending on the revenue that sport generates... In no world should the football team take less because of a sport nobody watches really! And when I have said this in the past, and I could be wrong, its just my opinion, people tell me that the reason football makes more is because of the way its advertised better and more often then Volleyball or Lacrosse, to which I agree, it does get promoted more, but that's because of people caring more about football!! I don't care how much ya spend on advertising Volleyball or some other smaller sport, its not gonna bring in many more eyes then they already have, so therefore you should be paid judging by the eyes ya bring, and the revenue ya generate.
Im in the third group
How does Jaden Rashada’s situation with the University of Florida look after this NCAA settlement?
There are still a lot of legal questions that need to be answered, which no one seems to be asking or addressing, and even more problems that could happen because of this
Football time is getting closer and closer!!!! Question for Joel, Are you going to try and play the College Football 25 game at all?
It's ruined all about the money
Joel as usual brilliantly breaks down the major details. As you said Joel, this is decades overdue.
So, will high school players be next?
I’m definitely a member of the second group, the only thing I would love to return is traditional conferences. Though it will be nice to see uw lose on a consistent basis to the B10 teams.
Just like in any sport, you should not be able to buy a championship. Sports requires a level playing field to be an overall popular event. Pro Baseball got ruined by not having a true salary cap. Now, if you are not cheering for a team that has the finances to dominate the market, it is not fun to watch. There are haves and total have nots. That is unwatchable for the have nots over time. College football will become just like it if money is the true king of winning and losing. Fans of the haves won't mind but fans of the have nots will go away in time.
Joel hits it on the head. This is a step in the right direction for NIL. This new era of college football whether you like it or not is here to stay. Schools and fans are either all in or all out.
Schools are either all in or all out in the top division and, more precisely, in the power conferences. But, there’s no reason to assume the same mentality or approach from the fans.
@@zplapplap a lot of fans don’t have that same approach. However, I believe it’s imperative to get behind this new era because it’s not going anywhere.
Truth is CFB has evolved constantly throughout its history. The old model was never going to withstand the financial growth experienced in the last ten years. -Joel
@@JoelKlattShow very true, Joel. It seemed like this was coming for a long time. I love the show, Joel. Hope you’re having a Happy Memorial Day.
Yet again people think this money is going to come from the money already being made. Coaches, presidents and universities are not going to take pay cuts. All this is doing is make a fan spend more money
Actually, I dont think Title IX is going to be the issue here with uneven revenue share. Title IX guarantees equal educational opportunities. It does not guarantee that every 'employee' get paid the same. The next step isnt seperating the non-revenue sports, it is admitting they are student employees. You play a revenue sport, you will get paid more (a lot more). That is fine as long as the scholarships are equal.
Womens teams will start whining they arent getting paid equally. This is women we are talking about here. Irrational, petty, jealous, women. It wont be enough they are getting a paid education and getting to play the sport they love. Most modern women are never happy.
It does make me wonder about how much support FB will get from the college/HS administrations. Colleges almost always get substantial money donations from the athletic departments. Will this go away? Will "good will" be enough? Surely not for all.
HS often have to deal with people thinking that sports cost too much. If those taxpayers now see a kid getting more $$$ than they make per year, they may not be so keen on supporting "revenue sports" when those revenues are to someone else.
I dont think this will completely play out how you expect. As a former athlete I am all for the athletes being able to make money, but now that you are opening the door for the funds to come directly from the university; it opens up a whole new world of headaches..... Now you have to designate are they considered employees of the University or are they contractors? How will them being an employee effective their scholarships? For revenue sharing sports do we even give scholarships? What about taxes? They are no longer considered student athletes, they are professionals; how do we tax them accordingly? What about their benefits package ie healthcare, retirement, etc. You have just added a whole bunch of people to the oversight of the human resources department. Now that you have all these employees donwe still count them towards academic standards?....... As a huge college football fan I am hoping for the best, but the whole picture could create a mess that are bad for the sport.
First of it had to happen in order for Conferences,Universities...not being sued to death.
Off course there are plenty of questions to be answered but thats what happens if somebody ignores important topics for decades so it gets bigger and bigger.
Atleast it gets finally addressed.
I dont See why it shouldnt be possible in an System which already allows 50% college scholarships and 100% college scholarships to add 100% + college scholarships.
@@adrianbuck8772 I don't think this will solve conferences and universities getting "sued to death". This just opens the door for other types of OSHA and EEOC lawsuits..... Here's the thing. I'm for athletes getting paid. I just don't like the direction of how they are going to get paid. They will essentially become University employees, which means they are now state employees and opens these athletes up to a whole different world
I think this could have all been much easier. Joel also needs to stop saying this is all great for college football. It won’t be.
First thing they should have done was make these kids sign contracts. 18 yr old kids sign contracts for the military all the time. Three year minimum contracts. Any action a kid does that inflicts monetary damages to the university can be recouped from future earnings. The education, stipends, food, medical, and bonuses for post season play would all be part of a benefits package. Collective bargaining mandatory every 4 years. NIL is controlled by the team you play for. Negotiated annually. But, kids signing contracts is the first priority. The big boys sign contracts. They wanna get paid like pros? Sign binding contracts to the schools you commit to.
Although I think athletes deserve to get paid, I believe this will unfortunately end up increasing tuition for all students
Will athletes be employees and get worker’s compensation insurance if they get injured? That’s what the Schools are trying to avoid. Employees cost a lot more than subcontractors. Payroll taxes, etc
I believe schools are allowed to, and in some cases are, providing insurance (different type but same concept) to the players. Alabama was doing it for sure. They add it as an inducement they don't get in trouble for because the player could be the beneficiary of the policy without owning the policy.
Players already get insurance for any injury sustained while doing something for the program. There’s also general health insurance for athletes who don’t otherwise have it. That’s been a thing for years even at small schools like where I played (FCS)
Players already get insurance for any injury sustained while doing something for the program. There’s also general health insurance for athletes who don’t otherwise have it. That’s been a thing for years even at small schools like where I played (FCS)
Each sport could have its own individual collective the directly funds players of that sport. So if i wanna fund the mens lacross team i go to one of their collective events. Because maybe i done care about football. So a school could have 25 colletives each getting individually funded, but run by a school collective department that answers to the AD.
Nothing is going to change about collectives. They aren't gonna try to limit the players' earnings.
Does that mean players will qualify for workman's comp during injury and recovery both in school and after due to cte.