(09-13-2019 10:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The TV networks just want an entertaining product - whether players get paid is irrelevant.

This is where I think you're either overlooking or disregarding a fundamental point. I agree that the TV networks just want an entertaining product, but I also believe the TV networks are smart enough to understand that further eroding competitive balance in college athletics by eliminating the amateurism rules will detrimentally affect the perceived entertainment value of their product. That will hit them in the wallet and therefore they have a stake in the NCAA preserving the status quo.

I acknowledge that many if not most college sports viewers only want to see "the best play the best" and don't care if the best become the best by having a large enough and rich enough fan base to buy the best players. They view that as the natural order of things and would be happy to see all of the amateurism rules dumped in favor of unhindered market economics. But there are two sizable chunks of the viewing audience who tune in because those rules preserve at least a semblance of a level playing field.

One chunk is fans of non-P5 schools who know their teams are at an economic disadvantage but pay to watch anyhow because they know that disadvantage isn't big enough to prevent their teams from competing at the highest level and sometimes winning. I keep spending good money year after year on cable, streaming and PPV fees because on some days -- not most days but some days -- Hawaii can beat an Arizona or Oregon State in football. On some days, non-P5 amateur student-athletes are talented enough and play together well enough to beat their P5 amateur student-athlete counterparts.

Of course the other chunk is casual fans who aren't deeply invested in a particular team but enjoy watching David occasionally take down Goliath. They're the ones boosting the ratings and hence the advertising value of games between Boise State or UCF and the P5 powers. They're the ones ESPN is targeting when it still shows clips of the Bronco's 2007 Fiesta Bowl victory over Oklahoma when hyping an upcoming G5 versus P5 showdown.

So I can't imagine that the TV networks have no trepidation about the emergence of an unhindered booster-driven cash market in college athletes. If it further concentrates competitive strength in a few dozen elite programs and leads to a more pronounced stratification or even a split within Division I then the result will be a devaluation of much of their inventory. Nobody stays tuned into blowouts and most folks won't pay for the opportunity to watch an expected blowout. And nobody will pay a premium to watch games between schools that have been officially relegated to a lower tier.

That's just two cents from my corner of the peanut gallery.