Quote:
Originally Posted by Solecismic
It relates to the brand. The SEC can certainly compete with NIL money and it has the geography advantage, but once this all shakes out and we finally get to the other side, the brands aren't worth as much (Texas and Texas A&M being the exceptions).
Will we get to the other side? Harbaugh made headlines while he was at Stanford by complaining that when he was at Michigan, he wasn't allowed to be a real student. The idea that college football and basketball players are amateurs and students... it's been an illusion for a long, long time. People seem OK with that.
What we have now is not sustainable. But I think it could be if there's some sort of CBA and none of these $9.5 million handshakes.
|
If people are OK with the illusion that college football and basketball players are amateurs and students, shouldn't those sports be able to maintain its current success and possibly grow if they separate the players who have the potential to earn those $9.5 million handshakes from actual amateurs and students?
I just finished watching the College Baseball World Series. I watched College Softball World Series, men's and women's lacrosse championships before that over the last month or so. Maybe it is because I have no idea about what the effects are from NIL on those sports or if any of the players are getting any money. I am sure they are not getting $9.5 million. Either way, those events looked and felt like I was watching college students playing college sports.
We can have the college football and basketball that only includes real students and amateurs. We see it at the FCS levels and below in football and Division II and below in basketball. I don't think schools and conference would generate the same revenue and the same quality of play if we took away the illusion and ensured that the games were being played by real students and amateurs. I guess everyone has a choice to make about which is more important to them.