canoso said:

---

Sorry, but with a free ride at a school with our cost, student athletes are far from "oppressed."

---

No one said they're "oppressed." But these schools don't get take in tens of millions of dollars a year in TV money and "pay" their athletes in largely cost-free vouchers.

The schools made the choice to turn college athletics into a money-making venture. The players are merely -- and quite rightly -- demanding their cut.

The NCAA's farcical amateurism model is collapsing on itself. It's only a matter of time before the schools are sharing their revenues with the athletes. The courts will eventually demand it.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

What would people here prefer? With the B1G and SEC about to start taking in huge amounts of money over the other conferences on an annual basis, the cat is out of the bag - even in a scenario where schools would have to share money with players, the financial discrepancy between those conferences and everyone else would continue to be a game changer and such a change would be merely reconfiguring the problem instead of solving it in a meaningful way.

---

This is not dissimilar to the time before scholarship limits. Always has been the haves and have-nots in college athletics. In a perfect world, it should adopt the NFL model and have equal revenue share across the Power Five, but you're right the cat is out of the bag.

I think NIL and the transfer portal will slowly start to chip away at interest in addition to the gap that will separate the big10 and secsecsec. Actually one of the best ideas I have heard is the NFL ought to subsidize college football / NIL for basically running its minor league.

It was still obscene that coaches made$10M+ a year, and athletes mainly from families with limited resources, got meal money. Free tuition is great, but it does not pay for gas, etc. If you cannot understand that, I give up. I do not know the right answer, and this NIL is also crazy and needs changes, but I do not feel bad about the world changing to benefit the players, instead of the Jimbo Fishers of the world.

I'm sure it's obscene to many that any employee makes multi- millions. Most of those making that money worked their way to a point where someone decided to pay them that. It's our market system that allows it.
College athletes aren't indentured servants. They can accept what they receive, or they can demand more and if they don't like what they receive, they can go on to other pursuits. It's their choice.

FFA0329 said:

---

It was still obscene that coaches made$10M+ a year, and athletes mainly from families with limited resources, got meal money. Free tuition is great, but it does not pay for gas, etc. If you cannot understand that, I give up. I do not know the right answer, and this NIL is also crazy and needs changes, but I do not feel bad about the world changing to benefit the players, instead of the Jimbo Fishers of the world.

---

Coaches' salaries have nothing to do with it.

Who paid for their food and gas in high school? Their iPhones? Their sneakers?

I don't mind the world benefitting players more, but let's do so without the whining as if they're put upon.

When are the CEO and other top executives of my company be forced to share their insane salaries with me and my co-workers?

All you Reverends are brainwashed. Good for you.

HarryMehre said:

---

When are the CEO and other top executives of my company be forced to share their insane salaries with me and my co-workers?

---

Sharing is caring

What was most entertaining was before NIL and the paid employee (coach) often shifted blame to the players (amateurs) for not "executing" a bad game plan/scheme/play call. Now by all means the "no-longer amateur" athlete can be benched for not playing at 110% or committing a bone headed penalty and lose or take a massive reduction to their NIL deal.

FFA0329 said:

---

Free tuition is great, but it does not pay for gas

---

The gas? Who do you think pays for the athletes to travel first class as many as 10 times per year and how much do you think that costs the university/AD? Chartering a jet to Morgantown isn't exactly cheap.

Baylorbears111 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

It's coming as the funds from the alumni run dry eventually.

Will be interesting to see.

---

You see that new California bill that is being proposed that would required their universities to share 50% of the their revenue with the athletes?

---

Unintended consequences will abound

The universities want their money. They'll find, or create within the conference, some contractual loophole where the money shows to come from some other source or is expensed out from the athletic department to the university in some way.

The blue bloods will be on the major networks and the rest of us will have to pay ESPN+, Peacock, some Fox equivalent and probably some internet source.

The separation will get wider and wider between the top 40 programs and the rest of us. And, top 40 will be judged by viewership and not W-L

johnnychimpo said:

---

FFA0329 said:

---

Free tuition is great, but it does not pay for gas

---

The gas? Who do you think pays for the athletes to travel first class as many as 10 times per year and how much do you think that costs the university/AD? Chartering a jet to Morgantown isn't exactly cheap.

---

Getting players to an athletic competition isn't a perk. It's a mandatory operating cost. It's frankly absurd that someone would try to paint it as such.

Flying them into Pittsburgh on a commercial flight (cheaper flight) next to the bathrooms and the bungee seat that the flight attendants sit on and then bussing them on a greyhound to Morgantown to stay at the Comfort Inn is a mandatory operating cost. Flying them on a charter directly to Morgantown to stay at the Embassy Suites is not...

johnnychimpo said:

---

Flying them into Pittsburgh on a commercial flight (cheaper flight) next to the bathrooms and the bungee seat that the flight attendants sit on and then bussing them on a greyhound to Morgantown to stay at the Comfort Inn is a mandatory operating cost. Flying them on a charter directly to Morgantown to stay at the Embassy Suites is not...

---

Dude you are responding to 100% works for the athletic department, so you won't get anywhere with this argument. But you are correct. I'm not surprised that people affiliated with Baylor view extreme luxury as a God-given right as if the mere thought of flying commercial with the unwashed masses is beneath them. Unfortunately, that is the worldview and thought process of the people making decisions for our university - Extreme luxury without the expectation of any sort of results in the win/loss column

bear2be2 said:

---

johnnychimpo said:

---

FFA0329 said:

---

Free tuition is great, but it does not pay for gas

---

The gas? Who do you think pays for the athletes to travel first class as many as 10 times per year and how much do you think that costs the university/AD? Chartering a jet to Morgantown isn't exactly cheap.

---

Getting players to an athletic competition isn't a perk. It's a mandatory operating cost. It's frankly absurd that someone would try to paint it as such.

---

who paid for their gas and grass in high school?

Because only a select few out of touch individuals believe this malarkey.

There is nothing free about any of it. Go spend a month in their shoes in and out of season. It's a full time job on top of being a full time student.

Golden Helmet said:

---

Because only a select few out of touch individuals believe this malarkey.

There is nothing free about any of it. Go spend a month in their shoes in and out of season. It's a full time job on top of being a full time student.

---

go easy on that full time student thing. Technically true for some but for many, it's some easy classes with a tutor(s) for each.

Timbear said:

---

Why is no one Ever mentioning the roughly $250,000 free education that athletes get along with free room and board for years?

---

I would argue respectfully that considering the amount of hours athletes have to put in to be competitive, the education is not free. Then there is the risk of serious injury etc..

Baylorbears111 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

It's coming as the funds from the alumni run dry eventually.

Will be interesting to see.

---

You see that new California bill that is being proposed that would required their universities to share 50% of the their revenue with the athletes?

---

No wonder people are leaving California. Ridiculous. Just start a semi pro league for goodness sakes.

This has gotten silly.

Universities running high-margin, semi-pro football teams funded by alums.

No one in their right mind would devise this if you were writing on a blank slate. It's the result of a long series of developments stacked on top of each other that landed us in a strange place. Add in NIL and the portal, and the idea that this is just an adjunct activity for the university and its students looks even more like a fiction than it did before.

I grew up loving college football, so I'm still following, but this just doesn't make much sense.

Would be great for someone to create a real developmental league feeding the NFL. But college football has built-in rabid fan bases (and the umbrella of a tax exemption that looks sillier by the day), so I just don't see that happening.

Robert Wilson said:

---

This has gotten silly.

Universities running high-margin, semi-pro football teams funded by alums.

No one in their right mind would devise this if you were writing on a blank slate. It's the result of a long series of developments stacked on top of each other that landed us in a strange place. Add in NIL and the portal, and the idea that this is just an adjunct activity for the university and its students looks even more like a fiction than it did before.

I grew up loving college football, so I'm still following, but this just doesn't make much sense.

Would be great for someone to create a real developmental league feeding the NFL. But college football has built-in rabid fan bases (and the umbrella of a tax exemption that looks sillier by the day), so I just don't see that happening.

---

Robert, you speak the truth.

Nobody wants the truth.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

This has gotten silly.

Universities running high-margin, semi-pro football teams funded by alums.

No one in their right mind would devise this if you were writing on a blank slate. It's the result of a long series of developments stacked on top of each other that landed us in a strange place. Add in NIL and the portal, and the idea that this is just an adjunct activity for the university and its students looks even more like a fiction than it did before.

I grew up loving college football, so I'm still following, but this just doesn't make much sense.

Would be great for someone to create a real developmental league feeding the NFL. But college football has built-in rabid fan bases (and the umbrella of a tax exemption that looks sillier by the day), so I just don't see that happening.

---

Robert, you speak the truth.

Nobody wants the truth.

---

Schools should discontinue everything but football and basketball. Then you revenue to invest in players in a standard way.

Golden Helmet said:

---

Because only a select few out of touch individuals believe this malarkey.

There is nothing free about any of it. Go spend a month in their shoes in and out of season. It's a full time job on top of being a full time student.

---

There has not since 1940 seemed to be a dearth of players willing to sign up for that deal.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

johnnychimpo said:

---

FFA0329 said:

---

Free tuition is great, but it does not pay for gas

---

The gas? Who do you think pays for the athletes to travel first class as many as 10 times per year and how much do you think that costs the university/AD? Chartering a jet to Morgantown isn't exactly cheap.

---

Getting players to an athletic competition isn't a perk. It's a mandatory operating cost. It's frankly absurd that someone would try to paint it as such.

---

who paid for their gas and grass in high school?

---

The school districts. It was an operating cost for them.

That's not a payment or perk.

Another 2nd and 3rd handed opinion that's out of touch with reality.

Completely false narrative.

Agreed…what's your point?

We are discussing the "free" on this topic.

If we're switching to supply and demand let me know.