I see no way for this present model to be sustainable for 90% of college teams. This ruling essentially takes any tampering or Pay for Play punishment off the table. College football can not work under these conditions for about 100 of the 120 D1 schools.

Anyone remotely good will be getting poached by big schools and that's just the way it is. This really is a "big 2" scenario going forward. No room for big12 or ACC to compete with what is essentially unregulated ***ery

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10110461-ncaas-nil-rules-suspended-after-federal-judge-issues-injunction-in-lawsuit

I think you are being pretty liberal with 20. With no portal restrictions and open season on inducements and pay to play, there just aren't many schools that can afford to get the best in the portal. Schools like Auburn and Fl State probably focused on just holding on to their own studs, and finding some diamonds in the rough.

Everyone else, definitely focused on finding what they can from the smaller schools and peer schools that aren't bid way up.

This system would actually fit Briles' approach pretty well (this is not a prompt to start a Briles debate - just a comment)

GoodOleBaylorLine said:

---

I think you are being pretty liberal with 20. With no portal restrictions and open season on inducements and pay to play, there just aren't many schools that can afford to get the best in the portal. Schools like Auburn and Fl State probably focused on just holding on to their own studs, and finding some diamonds in the rough.

Everyone else, definitely focused on finding what they can from the smaller schools and peer schools that aren't bid way up.

This system would actually fit Briles' approach pretty well (this is not a prompt to start a Briles debate - just a comment)

---

But if you get them coached up and they break out as stars......you lose them unless they show loyalty more than greed. There would probably be a few that do so, but probably not a lot.

Time for the XII to focus on basketball.

I don't see how anyone can compete with Oregon on NIL.

BUATX2000 said:

---

Anyone remotely good will be getting poached by big schools and that's just the way it is. This really is a "big 2" scenario going forward. No room for big12 or ACC to compete with what is essentially unregulated ***ery

---

If college football is really only exclusive to the SEC & B10 then national titles, winning etc. won't be as prestigious as they used to be.

If the same teams are winning every year then people will stop caring.

Doc Holliday said:

---

BUATX2000 said:

---

Anyone remotely good will be getting poached by big schools and that's just the way it is. This really is a "big 2" scenario going forward. No room for big12 or ACC to compete with what is essentially unregulated ***ery

---

If college football is really only exclusive to the SEC & B10 then national titles, winning etc. won't be as prestigious as they used to be.

If the same teams are winning every year then people will stop caring.

---

Which is why the P2 should break off and do their own thing. 2001 Miami was the last time a non P2 + FSU + Clemson team won an AP national title. Before that? 1990 (Colorado). Before that? 1984 (BYU). Before that? 1976 (Pitt). Beginning with the 1977 season, there have been only three years where a team outside of the P2 + FSU + Clemson has won an AP title.

Quote:

---

If college football is really only exclusive to the SEC & B10 then national titles, winning etc. won't be as prestigious as they used to be.

If the same teams are winning every year then people will stop caring.

---

NFL has 32 teams. B1G has 18 teams, SEC has 16 teams (after UT and OU join) and will almost certainly add Clemson and Florida State. ESPN may think that if it owns and operates the top tier College Football League with 36 teams that it will be a major money maker. Especially if they can tweak the membership a little (Illinois and Vandy out UNC and Utah in as examples).

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BUATX2000 said:

---

Anyone remotely good will be getting poached by big schools and that's just the way it is. This really is a "big 2" scenario going forward. No room for big12 or ACC to compete with what is essentially unregulated ***ery

---

If college football is really only exclusive to the SEC & B10 then national titles, winning etc. won't be as prestigious as they used to be.

If the same teams are winning every year then people will stop caring.

---

Which is why the P2 should break off and do their own thing. 2001 Miami was the last time a non P2 + FSU + Clemson team won an AP national title. Before that? 1990 (Colorado). Before that? 1984 (BYU). Before that? 1976 (Pitt). Beginning with the 1977 season, there have been only three years where a team outside of the P2 + FSU + Clemson has won an AP title.

---

100% agree.

Let the money schools buy their championships.

Let the other schools, like Baylor, live by NIL caps with contracts and possibly incentive based payments.

hodedofome said:

---

I don't see how anyone can compete with Oregon on NIL.

---

....... or Texas or aggy or Michigan or Ohio St.....

hodedofome said:

---

I don't see how anyone can compete with Oregon on NIL.

---

How can anyone compete with The University of Texas? They have more money than anyone! The same teams that are trying to induce other teams players to come to them now (cheating) were the same teams that were cheating on other things before. Money under the table before is now money over the table. The difference is you now have schools and boosters interfering and trying to induce. We need strong regulations to stop all the interference and inducements.

Potentially the death knell of college football, as far as anything resembling a sport we have cherished in our lifetimes.

Title IX just got a kick in the face as well.

Big guy said:

---

hodedofome said:

---

I don't see how anyone can compete with Oregon on NIL.

---

....... or Texas or aggy or Michigan or Ohio St.....

---

Yeah, Michigan vs Texas every year in the final would be lame, lame, lame.

BUATX2000 said:

---

I see no way for this present model to be sustainable for 90% of college teams. This ruling essentially takes any tampering or Pay for Play punishment off the table.

---

You are correct, the model isn't sustainable. It's why a lot of coaches and administrators are asking the Feds to step in and help.

All I know is that things will get worse before they get better..

Whether it is the NCAA or new governing body and a players union like the NFLPA there has to be some sort of governance over this with clearly defined rules. Same as for free agency in any of the pro sports. Teams cannot talk to players until X date, contracts have to be in place- even if they are only for one year at a time- and opposing teams cannot talk to that player until the end of the season, Specific date, etc.

CorsicanaBear said:

---

Quote:

---

If college football is really only exclusive to the SEC & B10 then national titles, winning etc. won't be as prestigious as they used to be.

If the same teams are winning every year then people will stop caring.

---

NFL has 32 teams. B1G has 18 teams, SEC has 16 teams (after UT and OU join) and will almost certainly add Clemson and Florida State. ESPN may think that if it owns and operates the top tier College Football League with 36 teams that it will be a major money maker. Especially if they can tweak the membership a little (Illinois and Vandy out UNC and Utah in as examples).

---

NFL also has a draft, salary cap, franchise tags, free agency rules, tampering rules, etc.

Next thing to go is roster caps of 85 so that NIL players can be warehoused.

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Title IX just got a kick in the face as well.

---

But Caitlin Clark says she gets nothing from NIL.

You mean not all women would do that???

Expect the bureaucrats to define NIL for males to be treated as part of a university's spending (even if it comes from the outside) so that what females get must be balanced!

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BUATX2000 said:

---

Anyone remotely good will be getting poached by big schools and that's just the way it is. This really is a "big 2" scenario going forward. No room for big12 or ACC to compete with what is essentially unregulated ***ery

---

If college football is really only exclusive to the SEC & B10 then national titles, winning etc. won't be as prestigious as they used to be.

If the same teams are winning every year then people will stop caring.

---

Which is why the P2 should break off and do their own thing. 2001 Miami was the last time a non P2 + FSU + Clemson team won an AP national title. Before that? 1990 (Colorado). Before that? 1984 (BYU). Before that? 1976 (Pitt). Beginning with the 1977 season, there have been only three years where a team outside of the P2 + FSU + Clemson has won an AP title.

---

Oklahoma, USC, Texas all won during that time span.

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BUATX2000 said:

---

Anyone remotely good will be getting poached by big schools and that's just the way it is. This really is a "big 2" scenario going forward. No room for big12 or ACC to compete with what is essentially unregulated ***ery

---

If college football is really only exclusive to the SEC & B10 then national titles, winning etc. won't be as prestigious as they used to be.

If the same teams are winning every year then people will stop caring.

---

Which is why the P2 should break off and do their own thing. 2001 Miami was the last time a non P2 + FSU + Clemson team won an AP national title. Before that? 1990 (Colorado). Before that? 1984 (BYU). Before that? 1976 (Pitt). Beginning with the 1977 season, there have been only three years where a team outside of the P2 + FSU + Clemson has won an AP title.

---

Oklahoma, USC, Texas all won during that time span.

---

They'll be P2 in a couple of months. Sorry if not clear - expanded P2 was the implication.

This isn't completely new historically speaking. Pre scholarship limit rules in the 1970s, that led to Clemson, UGA, Miami, FSU, BYU, Penn St, Washington, Colorado, and GT all winning their first titles, the big schools like Texas, Bama, and USC would have over 100 dudes on scholarship. They'd recruit anyone they thought might be good just to keep them from going to Baylor, Oregon, or UGA. A scholarship cap evened the playing field. Creating the following 3 decades of more level play.

At some point I'm sure a leveling idea will come about. What it is idk. Maybe a super league breaks away before then. But as mentioned if the same 4 teams win every year the average fan will tune out. NCAA is unlikely to the be the organization to fix it.

cowboycwr said:

---

Whether it is the NCAA or new governing body and a players union like the NFLPA there has to be some sort of governance over this with clearly defined rules. Same as for free agency in any of the pro sports. Teams cannot talk to players until X date, contracts have to be in place- even if they are only for one year at a time- and opposing teams cannot talk to that player until the end of the season, Specific date, etc.

---

I agree but the problem is fragmentation. There isn't one head office like the NFL, which can sort it out.

It's 4 power conferences plus a dozen smaller ones, all in business for themselves.

I doubt that the B10 and SEC want to revenue share with anyone outside of their conference - but for the long term health of the sport, that is what needs to happen. There needs to be a new conference, something like a 60 team with equal TV revenue shares.

I think the likelihood of that is almost zero, though. Unless it's just going to be the B10 and SEC that form 1 conference with revenue sharing and they leave the ACC and Big 12 and everyone else out. That would leave almost 100 schools outside looking in.

If that were the case, to be honest, those 'leftover' schools need to band together and tell the new super conference to go **** themselves and not schedule any games with them. Then those 30 teams can just play each other which, imho, isn't going to be all that great of a thing.

montypython said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Whether it is the NCAA or new governing body and a players union like the NFLPA there has to be some sort of governance over this with clearly defined rules. Same as for free agency in any of the pro sports. Teams cannot talk to players until X date, contracts have to be in place- even if they are only for one year at a time- and opposing teams cannot talk to that player until the end of the season, Specific date, etc.

---

I agree but the problem is fragmentation. There isn't one head office like the NFL, which can sort it out.

It's 4 power conferences plus a dozen smaller ones, all in business for themselves.

I doubt that the B10 and SEC want to revenue share with anyone outside of their conference - but for the long term health of the sport, that is what needs to happen. There needs to be a new conference, something like a 60 team with equal TV revenue shares.

I think the likelihood of that is almost zero, though. Unless it's just going to be the B10 and SEC that form 1 conference with revenue sharing and they leave the ACC and Big 12 and everyone else out. That would leave almost 100 schools outside looking in.

If that were the case, to be honest, those 'leftover' schools need to band together and tell the new super conference to go **** themselves and not schedule any games with them. Then those 30 teams can just play each other which, imho, isn't going to be all that great of a thing.

---

I think it could work even with the multiple conferences. It just has to be an organization above them, like the NCAA that has actual enforcement and power over NIL and transfer rules.

I think we will get a super conference at some point but I think the other 100 schools will be fine. They won't generate the profit of those big boys but they will still be able to make money and get good players.

cowboycwr said:

---

montypython said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Whether it is the NCAA or new governing body and a players union like the NFLPA there has to be some sort of governance over this with clearly defined rules. Same as for free agency in any of the pro sports. Teams cannot talk to players until X date, contracts have to be in place- even if they are only for one year at a time- and opposing teams cannot talk to that player until the end of the season, Specific date, etc.

---

I agree but the problem is fragmentation. There isn't one head office like the NFL, which can sort it out.

It's 4 power conferences plus a dozen smaller ones, all in business for themselves.

I doubt that the B10 and SEC want to revenue share with anyone outside of their conference - but for the long term health of the sport, that is what needs to happen. There needs to be a new conference, something like a 60 team with equal TV revenue shares.

I think the likelihood of that is almost zero, though. Unless it's just going to be the B10 and SEC that form 1 conference with revenue sharing and they leave the ACC and Big 12 and everyone else out. That would leave almost 100 schools outside looking in.

If that were the case, to be honest, those 'leftover' schools need to band together and tell the new super conference to go **** themselves and not schedule any games with them. Then those 30 teams can just play each other which, imho, isn't going to be all that great of a thing.

---

I think it could work even with the multiple conferences. It just has to be an organization above them, like the NCAA that has actual enforcement and power over NIL and transfer rules.

---

Enforcement is no longer legal. The only way to fix things is come up with a completely new model.

blackie said:

---

GoodOleBaylorLine said:

---

I think you are being pretty liberal with 20. With no portal restrictions and open season on inducements and pay to play, there just aren't many schools that can afford to get the best in the portal. Schools like Auburn and Fl State probably focused on just holding on to their own studs, and finding some diamonds in the rough.

Everyone else, definitely focused on finding what they can from the smaller schools and peer schools that aren't bid way up.

This system would actually fit Briles' approach pretty well (this is not a prompt to start a Briles debate - just a comment)

---

But if you get them coached up and they break out as stars......you lose them unless they show loyalty more than greed. There would probably be a few that do so, but probably not a lot.

---

Big sport shows us that not very many players show a lot of loyalty. I think most players will opt for the bigger money.

This will eventually get fixed because ESPN will want it fixed. They're tearing it down and destroying it first, so that rebuilding it in the NFL image will be readily accepted.

montypython said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

montypython said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Whether it is the NCAA or new governing body and a players union like the NFLPA there has to be some sort of governance over this with clearly defined rules. Same as for free agency in any of the pro sports. Teams cannot talk to players until X date, contracts have to be in place- even if they are only for one year at a time- and opposing teams cannot talk to that player until the end of the season, Specific date, etc.

---

I agree but the problem is fragmentation. There isn't one head office like the NFL, which can sort it out.

It's 4 power conferences plus a dozen smaller ones, all in business for themselves.

I doubt that the B10 and SEC want to revenue share with anyone outside of their conference - but for the long term health of the sport, that is what needs to happen. There needs to be a new conference, something like a 60 team with equal TV revenue shares.

I think the likelihood of that is almost zero, though. Unless it's just going to be the B10 and SEC that form 1 conference with revenue sharing and they leave the ACC and Big 12 and everyone else out. That would leave almost 100 schools outside looking in.

If that were the case, to be honest, those 'leftover' schools need to band together and tell the new super conference to go **** themselves and not schedule any games with them. Then those 30 teams can just play each other which, imho, isn't going to be all that great of a thing.

---

I think it could work even with the multiple conferences. It just has to be an organization above them, like the NCAA that has actual enforcement and power over NIL and transfer rules.

---

Enforcement is no longer legal. The only way to fix things is come up with a completely new model.

---

Under the current model enforcement is not legal. But it could be with changes to the current model. I don't think it needs a whole new model and new agency to enforce it. Just changes to the current one. I think a new agency, like a players union and new NCAA type organization, would work.

Why would anyone think NFL lite is preferable to the college game? If NFL lite was a winner, wouldn't the NFL have already created it. There's nothing stopping them from creating a league for kids out of high school, especially if college football abandons its traditional design.

montypython said:

---

Proud 1992 Alum said:

---

If NFL lite was a winner, wouldn't the NFL have already created it. There's nothing stopping them from creating a league for kids out of high school, especially if college football abandons its traditional design.

---

The NFL has a free farm system in college football - which is why they haven't attempted to mess with it.

No business in their right mind would volunteer to cough up additional hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars in expense - which is what an NFL farm system would cost.

---

Good point. The NFL doesn't need a minor league because the majority of players that are drafted and expected to make a roster are ready to do that. The other sports have minor leagues either because they have been around forever and college baseball didn't really become their farm league or like in basketball because so many players left college too early but had future potential so they needed to create one for that in between college and pro basketball.

I don't think anyone wants to create that with college football. They just want to create a super division of just the blue bloods and get as much money as they can and leave all the others behind in their own division. But of course the people that want that probably still want the left behinds to play some games against the blue bloods.

The NFL really is the missing link in the discussion. It should pay NIL to players for the free minor league it gets on the backs of universities.

Big guy said:

---

hodedofome said:

---

I don't see how anyone can compete with Oregon on NIL.

---

....... or Texas or aggy or Michigan or Ohio St.....

---

Oregon is completely different because of Nike and Phil Knight. They can throw ridiculous millions at college athletes and expect a real ROI. They've been doing it for decades with pro athletes, and can use the same playbook at Oregon. Nobody else has the backing of one of the largest companies in the world like that.

hodedofome said:

---

Big guy said:

---

hodedofome said:

---

I don't see how anyone can compete with Oregon on NIL.

---

....... or Texas or aggy or Michigan or Ohio St.....

---

Oregon is completely different because of Nike and Phil Knight. They can throw ridiculous millions at college athletes and expect a real ROI. They've been doing it for decades with pro athletes, and can use the same playbook at Oregon. Nobody else has the backing of one of the largest companies in the world like that.

---

I understand and somewhat agree with your general premise - Knight is a very generous donor to Oregon - how can anyone compete with that? However it is not that simplistic.

No business is going to just throw money at a person unless they feel there is a high percentage of likelihood that they get a great return on it.

Nike's all-time move was getting MJ to sign on. Sure they bent over and agreed to pay him per shoe - no other company had ever done that and no one else was even offering that. However, MJ was a once in a lifetime athlete and he alone sent Nike's stock to the moon. Jordan's are still the #1 basketball shoe and he's been retired for what, 2 decades now?

Oregon is not going to be able to just dip in the Nike money well to get anyone they want.
Throwing money at high school kids who have no obligation to stay and who may transfer a year later, isn't a successful business model. Plus, football is a lot different than basketball. Football shoes don't fly off the shelves and make up the majority of the sneaker market. It's basketball shoes that own it. Nike isn't going to sign up some WR or OL or QB out of high school to a multi year mega deal to get them to play for Oregon because the risks are too high and no one is going to give a **** about a kid who hasn't even stepped on the playing field yet. That is - people aren't going to rush out and buy the shoes - even if the kid has a good freshman season at Oregon.

Now, if Knight just wants to blow a bunch of his personal money because he is bored and thinks that will help out the football team - I guess that's a possibility. But that's not what I would be worried about. What we need to worry about is when TV revenue gets shared with players and there isn't a CBA / salary cap and a fair structure across the board (unlikely). The Big 12 and ACC is making half of what the B10 and SEC makes. It will end up being akin to baseball. The b10 and sec will be the majors and the acc and Big 12 will be AA ball.