• The KillerFrogs

DMN: How Texas schools are handling the House settlement, preparing to pay players directly

F

froglash88

Full Member
Big Frog II said:
I wonder how many of those schools are going to come up with $20.5 million + every year when they are already in the red due to very little TV revenue?
Click to expand...
Programs that opt-in to revenue sharing with their athletes can spend a maximum of $20.5 million in the 2025-26 school year across all sports, according to the NCAA. That cap will increase by about 4% every year during the decade-long deal, ending at an estimated $32.9 million in 2034-35.
 
T

tetonfrog

Active Member
The positive thing to me is that the money is out in the open now. Fair or not. There have always been greedy players and corrupt coaches and boosters. At least we know there are no rules now.

Imagine how successful TCU would have been in the mid '80s if the NCAA had not crushed us after Wacker turned us in for cheating in 1985. We would have had an outstanding recruiting class in 1985, an even stronger season than the Unbelievable season of 1984, driven boosters, a charismatic coach and the program would have taken off.

Instead, the NCAA gutted us like a fish and Wacker was demoralized at the end of the tenure here. Anyone who wants a return to the good ol' days needs to focus on this. ATM, UT, the rest of the SWC and all of the SEC schools except for Vandy paid players under the table. Only a few programs - like us and SMU - were punished.
 
W

Wexahu

Full Member
tetonfrog said:
The positive thing to me is that the money is out in the open now. Fair or not. There have always been greedy players and corrupt coaches and boosters. At least we know there are no rules now.

Imagine how successful TCU would have been in the mid '80s if the NCAA had not crushed us after Wacker has turned us in for cheating in 1985. We would have had an outstanding recruiting class in 1985, an even stronger season than the Unbelievable season of 1984, driven boosters, a charismatic coach and the program would have taken off.

Instead, the NCAA gutted us like a fish and Wacker was demoralized at the end of the tenure here. Anyone who wants a return to the good ol' days needs to focus on this. ATM, UT, the rest of the SWC and all of the SEC schools except for Vandy paid players under the table. Only a few programs - like us and SMU - were punished.
Click to expand...
I don't think we would have been worth a crap if players could make whatever they wanted and transfer every year to the highest bidder.

There's almost no comparison to that climate and what we have today. It's a completely different ballgame. There's nothing positive about it from a fan's perspective.
 
T

tetonfrog

Active Member
Wexahu said:
I don't think we would have been worth a crap if players could make whatever they wanted and transfer every year to the highest bidder.

There's almost no comparison to that climate and what we have today. It's a completely different ballgame. There's nothing positive about it from a fan's perspective.
Click to expand...
I understand that you hate the current model of NCAAs. Fine. I do agree with you about the transfer portal. But why is it OK for a coach to leave at any time, but a player cannot? And why is it OK for a coach to pull a player's scholarship at any time, but it sucks for a player to be able to move to a better situation every year?

That sounds like a double standard to me.
 
Last edited:
W

Wexahu

Full Member
tetonfrog said:
I understand that you hate the current model of NCAAs. Fine. I do agree with you about the transfer portal. But why is it OK for a coach to leave at any time, but a player cannot? And why is it OK for a coach to pull a player's scholarship at any time, but it sucks for a player to be able to move to a better situation every year?

That sounds like a double standard to me.
Click to expand...
Because it's absolutely essential for having some semblance of competitive balance? That argument just doesn't make any sense to me. Coaches coach, and players play. There isn't another sports league in the world (at least not one that anyone cares to follow) where players can chose their team, make an unlimited amount of money, and switch teams from year to year to the highest bidder. Not one. Why do think that is? Is that just the way it worked out or does everyone involved in sports understand that that is just how it has to be.

If the NFL, MLB, NHL, and the NBA decided tomorrow they were going to do away with drafts, salary caps, and multi-year contracts those leagues would be an absolute shell of themselves almost overnight. 2/3 of the teams would have no chance of competing, much less winning anything of consequence, and that's being conservative.

Besides, I've always heard, "well, if the head coach leaves, then the player ought to be able to leave too and play right away because the coach doesn't have to take a year off". [ What the heck? ]? How do we even know the player picked the school because of the head coach? It might have been because of some low level assistant. Or because his girlfriend went there. Or it was close to home. The player might actually hate the head coach and wish he would leave. And it's not like requiring a kid to sit out a year for transferring would be like a death sentence, it worked fine for 100 years. They could still transfer. And since when in sports do players always get to choose their coach?

We're going to find out how much TV network marketing and school branding can carry something, because the actual product from a sports fan standpoint is garbage. Just like the other major sports leagues would be if they took out all the guardrails around player acquisition and roster makeup. I think we're already seeing cracks with ratings dropping and the constant changes in the playoff structure to try and desperately add money. There used to be valid reasons why people preferred NCAA football over the NFL. Now there are none, unless you want to stick your hand in the sand and pretend like those jerseys mean anything more than a means to take money from you.
 
Horned Frog Country

Horned Frog Country

Full Member
BrewingFrog said:
We're simply seen as animated bags of money they can take from.
Click to expand...
This situation in college sports in how it has basically become pro sports is downright depressing. I never thought college sports would go this extreme of a direction. The real sad aspect of it is that the elected politicians do not have any desire to preserve stability of college sports on any level.
 
NovaScotiaFrog

NovaScotiaFrog

Active Member
Wexahu said:
Because it's absolutely essential for having some semblance of competitive balance? That argument just doesn't make any sense to me. Coaches coach, and players play. There isn't another sports league in the world (at least not one that anyone cares to follow) where players can chose their team, make an unlimited amount of money, and switch teams from year to year to the highest bidder. Not one. Why do think that is? Is that just the way it worked out or does everyone involved in sports understand that that is just how it has to be.

If the NFL, MLB, NHL, and the NBA decided tomorrow they were going to do away with drafts, salary caps, and multi-year contracts those leagues would be an absolute shell of themselves almost overnight. 2/3 of the teams would have no chance of competing, much less winning anything of consequence, and that's being conservative.

Besides, I've always heard, "well, if the head coach leaves, then the player ought to be able to leave too and play right away because the coach doesn't have to take a year off". [ What the heck? ]? How do we even know the player picked the school because of the head coach? It might have been because of some low level assistant. Or because his girlfriend went there. Or it was close to home. The player might actually hate the head coach and wish he would leave. And it's not like requiring a kid to sit out a year for transferring would be like a death sentence, it worked fine for 100 years. They could still transfer. And since when in sports do players always get to choose their coach?

We're going to find out how much TV network marketing and school branding can carry something, because the actual product from a sports fan standpoint is garbage. Just like the other major sports leagues would be if they took out all the guardrails around player acquisition and roster makeup. I think we're already seeing cracks with ratings dropping and the constant changes in the playoff structure to try and desperately add money. There used to be valid reasons why people preferred NCAA football over the NFL. Now there are none, unless you want to stick your hand in the sand and pretend like those jerseys mean anything more than a means to take money from you.
Click to expand...
With respect, you seem to keep trying to compare it to how other sports are run, but only as it pertains to player movement. You didn't really answer the question posed by @tetonfrog about why college coaches are allowed to move in ways that other sports prohibit, that doesn't seem to bother you? Other sports generally don't let coaches talk to another team without permission, and they certainly don't let them leave in the middle of the season like college does. Do you want that banned in college too? Other sports have CBA's, are you asking for collective bargaining in college ball?

I think a lot of what you say is correct, it's a bad way to run a sports league. There are solutions, but they do have to be legal. You can't just say "let's go back to the way we did it in 2010" and expect that to work.
 
BrewingFrog

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
Horned Frog Country said:
This situation in college sports in how it has basically become pro sports is downright depressing. I never thought college sports would go this extreme of a direction. The real sad aspect of it is that the elected politicians do not have any desire to preserve stability of college sports on any level.
Click to expand...
It isn't just the politicians, it's the whole dramatis personae. The politicians just want to make a buck or two, and help their benefactors make a buck or two so they can kick some back. The Programs/Universities just want to make as much as they can, as quickly as they can. The Networks, ditto. And they jigger and poke at the system to wring more money out every year.

We just want to watch football...
 
TopFrog

TopFrog

Lifelong Frog
An-Cap Frog said:
Did you see that 5-star OL that just committed to Tech for a guaranteed contract?

Click to expand...

I don't see how this is sustainable.

From the school that paid a softball pitcher $1 Million (though they came within a game of winning a natty. Just that softball is not a revenue sport).

To that point, most college athletics teams are supported by football revenue as well as some other sources such as private and corporate dollars. Still, programs are acting like there are infinite dollars to throw around.

And if you don't win ... hoo boy.
 
An-Cap Frog

An-Cap Frog

Member
TopFrog said:
I don't see how this is sustainable.

From the school that paid a softball pitcher $1 Million (though they came within a game of winning a natty. Just that softball is not a revenue sport).

To that point, most college athletics teams are supported by football revenue as well as some other sources such as private and corporate dollars. Still, programs are acting like there are infinite dollars to throw around.

And if you don't win ... hoo boy.
Click to expand...
The joke is on him, there is no way I'm living in Lubbock for anything less than $6 million.
 
BrewingFrog

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
FroggleRock said:
I don’t understand, did they just blow 1/4 of their entire NIL budget on an o-lineman?
Click to expand...
The concerning word there is "guaranteed." To what extent? Are they literally paying the kid if he turns out to be a bench rider and locker room cancer?
 

Latest posts

Top