(05-19-2020 06:52 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-19-2020 06:38 AM)chester Wrote:  

(05-19-2020 03:42 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-19-2020 02:03 AM)chester Wrote:  

(05-19-2020 12:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  The P5 needs to acquiesce to these pending changes and use it as a reason to leave the NCAA (which will only stall) behind. With the world of hurt the universities have suffered with the virus shutdown maximizing our revenue in basketball is as worthy of goal (ala OU/UGa vs the NCAA) as we could possibly have. We can make the changes the norm quickly and move past the NCAA and past the court rulings and into some much needed stable operations by utilizing this moment in time to make changes. Otherwise the NCAA is going to incumber each school with their stalling tactics. If we stay that course we'll all suffer all the more.

The golden days of private contributions to athletic funds is probably past peak now and with the looming economic fallout likely not to return, at least not for many years. We need to maximize all revenue streams as soon as possible. It's time to embrace the changes and move on.

JR, I 100% agree with you. Absolutely! Problem is, the SEC and the rest of the Ps don't agree with us. We Ps have all long been the prime perpetrators of this crime against valuable athletes, for we attract the most valuable among them but still subjugate them to fake "amateurism". To formally withdraw from the Cartel is admit that there is some distinction between ourselves and the rest, which would make it ever more difficult to rob folks under the guise, the lie of "amateurism."

What we really need is for fans of Ps to demand that the athletes be treated properly. I refuse to believe that that the level of pay has anything at all to do with why we support our teams. No, it's because they attend our schools...

Estimates for a breakaway P league, whether that is 2 to 4 conferences playing a self contained schedule is between 110 million per to 120 million. If that doesn't grab the attention of the AD's and Presidents to make this move nothing ever will, especially with what they are facing right now in shortfalls.

They should, for publicity's sake, be thinking of distancing themselves from a NCAA which is going to come out of this as the poster child of the plantation owner. The sooner we get ahead of this the better off we are.

I'm assuming that the upper tier would consist of between 48 to 56 schools after a few privates bow out of football, concentrate on basketball, and maybe a couple of G5's try to make the jump in investment level.

The natural winnowing of programs who won't or can't compete in a system that compensates and insures players will permit us to define whose in by voluntary association and established minimums will take care of the pretenders.

Then we need to get about ensuring that rivals are kept, regional scheduling for fans observed as much as is practical, and 1 or 2 OOC games of interest are played a year.

The structure needs to take care of the playoff participants based on seasonal long on field performance.

Build a winner of a system and it will stay a winner.

JR, here again I agree, but here again I thinlk that the SEC and the rest disagree with you and I. We, the P5 ARE the plantation owners. We conrol it all. We've shown zero willingness to treat the athletes fairly and have shown zero willingness to depart from the rest even if it means more money in the bank.

We area the sinners. We are the asshats controlling the whole charade. Things won't change until such time as we the fans or the courts or Congress force change. It's that simple. Meantime, we suuuck. We ALL suck.

Chester, I got it the first time. I'm doing what I can to send a Sicilian message. Oddly enough I have readers. We are most definitely guilty, but what I'm saying is here's our chance to hang it on the NCAA and get out a helluva lot cleaner than we will ever be able to in the future if we wait. They need to hear this. And I agree that fans everywhere need to write their president and their AD's. Culturally we are on a precipice and we can either look like leaders, or get pushed off into the ravine. I simply favor the former as you do.

What they don't realize are the enormous benefits of setting up such an arrangement. The players are then subject to image standards of the university in ways they've never been able to be held accountable before and we can tell them up front it is all in preparation of what the NFL is going to ask as well. Now instead of being the social underclass on campus they will be part of the face of the program in ways nobody would have ever permitted in the past.

The whole move removes recruiting stigma, makes honest the old payola by boosters, makes the kids honest taxpayers instead of crooked amateurs, and it sets a tone for a kind of discipline that has heretofore not existed. Now if you get drunk or shoplift you are the face of the program and breach will be summarily dealt with and careers over. No more shuffling off quietly to play somewhere else. Image conscious schools won't like taking those who had to be dismissed with cause, as opposed to players rumored to have had difficulties.

Many Olympic sports are losers money-wise. I'll show my cards here and say that I tend toward the conservative side of the political spectrum. That's pertinent because of one thing: Title IX. Schools can't just cut drastically all non-money making sports, because then, in most schools, there would be no "womens sports." Obviously there are exceptions (UConn women's basketball, maybe a few softball programs, etc.)

But, what if college sports truly became separate not just from the NCAA but from the college itself. Colleges no longer offer ANY athletic scholarships.

BUT: College sports still exist, just no longer associated with the school in the same way. Eligibility to play in the college sports leagues is still based on college attendance/full-time enrollment in an undergraduate program, with 4-6 years of eligibility.

In other words, college sports become a professional minor league. The "Tennessee Vols" still have orange and white as their predominant colors (they would have to sign a contract for the rights to those colors with the university), but now they can recruit any player they want, offer any $ they want. And players can sign contracts for any length they want with opt-out clauses built in.

So if I am high school senior and decide I want to play for the football team Tennessee Vols, then I sign a contract for X amount and agree to play for four years. There is no scholarship, but my salary covers my tuition/room and board, other fees, +.

I have an opt-out in my contract that opens up if the coach changes as well as one that states that I can opt-out if I am not getting at least x % of the possible snaps, etc. Then I could be a free agent and go to another school. When my four years are up, I could stay for a 5th year as I do graduate work, or I could be a free agent and go somewhere else.

It would work for the revenue sports.

The Olympic sports would be separate too, and thus avoid Title IX issues. There is now just, for instance, an NACSC (National Association for College Swimming Competitions). There is a a CGCA (College Gymnastics Competition Association). There is a FCVL (Federal College Volleyball League). Each could have corporate sponsors, and each would make only as much as the free market permitted. On top of those salaries, a private company could simply hire an athlete from one of the Olympic sports as a commercial actor, or pay for their endorsement. In an Olympic year, those commercial prices go up and the athletes make more money.

But the school is not hemorrhaging money for non-viable sports, and does not run afoul of Title IX issues.

I guess what I am talking about is one step removed from a "student-athlete" but the requirement would be that the athletes still be students. You could even put in minimum GPA requirements.

The "top tier" could still give back to universities if they wanted, but there would be no necessary formal relationship.

I hope this idea makes at least some sense.