(10-02-2019 09:35 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: If they turn it into a minor league sport, with salaries and free agency, then they'll lose the fans. College football will become just like the NBA G-League, or AAA baseball. And it'll have similar fan support. I don't think that's what anyone wants.
I see this argument a lot, but I just don't buy that very many fans will make that distinction or care. Heck, I already see college football and basketball as minor league sports except with a much stronger emotional connection. To argue that they are anything other than that *today* (especially at the Power 5 level) is being quite naive. There's a vocal old school segment that might superficially believe that the sky is falling, but I've found in all of my years that the most hollow threat of all threats in the entire universe is a sports fan claiming that he/she will not watch his/her favorite team because of [insert reason]. As soon as they start winning, all of those supposed dealbreaker principles go by the wayside.
I *do* think that fans care that the name of their alma mater is on the jersey (e.g. there's a big difference between the emotional connection to the Ohio State Buckeyes versus the Columbus Clippers), but I honestly don't believe whether players get compensated make any more difference than the fact that all of the coaches (who are generally the highest paid public employees in virtually every state), professors, administrators, the non-athlete students that clean up the stadiums/facilities and tutor athletes, and literally every single other person associated with the athletic program receives some sort of compensation.
It doesn't compute in my brain that we can have this massive college sports industrial complex financed by billions of dollars of TV revenue, donations, and sponsorships and we can then sit here and claim that the actual athletes that fuel all of that getting compensated would suddenly be a bridge too far. I'd buy it more if head coaches were paid at the same rate as normal professor (as opposed to 50 professors) and schools decided to return all of the money from ESPN/Fox/CBS/NBC and Nike/Adidas/Under Armour. Otherwise, it's really nonsensical. Millennials and Generation Z certainly don't care (and if anything, are the ones that are the most flabbergasted that their athletic peers aren't being paid with all of the money being thrown around with college sports).
To paraphrase Jerry Seinfeld, we're all rooting for laundry. I'm certainly not going to be bothered if Illinois starts winning more football and basketball games because it can start drawing more 5-star recruits because our state is looking to pass a law that matches the California law to allow for third party athlete compensation. Heck, this might be the best way for schools like ours to actually have some type of competitive advantage over Michigan and Ohio State. If we're just competing on tradition and branding, we lose pretty much every time. If we can start competing based on compensation, we can actually start winning some of those recruiting battles. The status quo actually entrenches the power of the elite programs, whereas a more open free market actually allows schools that don't have the decades of branding and tradition to compete better in the marketplace because the color of green is rational and unbiased.