NCAA in "Deep Discussion" to Implement Revenue Sharing with Athletes

Lorewarn said:
I give this less than three months before they get sued and get an injunction because there is zero chance that this is legal.
Click to expand...
Right, the weird part is that this requires athletes to not seek employment status - where they're likely to make more money - and there's no guarantee that courts won't agree that they're price fixing labor anyway. 

No matter how it's sliced, we're kicking the can down the road to eventual CBAs.

Mavric said:
Click to expand...
My main argument is that talent for major sports, especially football is already consolidated to a handful of teams. 

I fear that 105 scholarships will make this sport borderline unwatchable. If Ohio State/Bama/Georgia each hoard 20 more 4* players, the rest of the sport will fight for scraps.

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
I fear that 105 scholarships will make this sport borderline unwatchable.
Click to expand...


Was it unwatchable between 1973 and 1978, the last time when the cap was 105? Or prior to 1973, when schools could have as many athletic scholarships as they wanted?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Toe said:
Was it unwatchable between 1973 and 1978, the last time when the cap was 105? Or prior to 1973, when schools could have as many athletic scholarships as they wanted?
Click to expand...
The world is totally the same as 50 years ago, right?

While I don't think all 4 and 5 star kids will congregate at 5 schools always, but if they did he wouldn't be wrong about the product. 

 
Not sure if all these numbers are accurate but...


GTqCniuWcAAY2I8


GTqCpM8XkAAqxCU


GTqCqwwXQAAbsql


 
Interesting thread on how coaches/athletic departments might treat the 105.  Its 10 or 12 tweets long, so not posting the whole thing here.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Red Five said:
Interesting thread on how coaches/athletic departments might treat the 105.  Its 10 or 12 tweets long, so not posting the whole thing here.
Click to expand...


Thanks for posting.

Some interesting points.  But I'm surprised at how many people don't understand that the 85 limit has been in name only since NIL came on the scene.  If it was a true 20 player increase, it would be significant.  It's not.  The Huskers have been at least in the mid-90s at least for the last couple of years and probably higher than that.  I wouldn't be at all surprised if the 105 is 2-3 more "scholarship" kids for Nebraska, depending on how much help some of those guys are already getting.

This is a far smaller issue than people are saying.  The big difference is dropping the last 10-30 kids off the roster (depending on school) which sucks but those guys are only practice players, not the guys getting the "scholarships" or helping out on the field.

 
Mavric said:
You're assuming that schools are only at 85 "scholarship" guys right now.  Which is a bad assumption.
Click to expand...
While true, as far as I know, Nebraska is unique in their approach to a roster their size. 

I distinctly remember reading how schools like Georgia prioritize using NIL money to get the highest quality of player instead of bolstering the 86th best player on the roster. Now that schools can fund that player, it means much less talent to go around. 

Nebraska already fills out is recruiting class at the bottom with players with G5 offer lists, I don't see a world where Nebraska is adding more talent just because we have more scholarships to give out. I don't think the same is true for the top recruiting teams in the country. 

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
While true, as far as I know, Nebraska is unique in their approach to a roster their size. 
Click to expand...


I was responding to your comment about the big dogs being able to add 20 more blue chip recruits to their roster and that changing things considerably.  Nebraska has already added most of those 20.  I would be shocked if most others - at least the same big dogs - have not also done that already.  So your concern about the big schools stockpiling more talent has already happened and there won't be any significant change when the "limit" is changed to 105.  If anything, that is more of a limit than there is now - not less - because it is a hard cap whereas the "soft cap" of 85 really hasn't applied for several years now.

Dr. Strangelove said:
I distinctly remember reading how schools like Georgia prioritize using NIL money to get the highest quality of player instead of bolstering the 86th best player on the roster. Now that schools can fund that player, it means much less talent to go around. 
Click to expand...


There has been some shift towards rewarding your best players and keeping the guys you want.  But that doesn't mean that the 86th player wasn't already getting scholarship-type money.  Nebraska has been giving that type of money to 10-15 guys past the 85 already (maybe more).  Other schools have been doing that as well.  All the big boys have already been stockpiling talent past 85.

Dr. Strangelove said:
Nebraska already fills out is recruiting class at the bottom with players with G5 offer lists, I don't see a world where Nebraska is adding more talent just because we have more scholarships to give out. I don't think the same is true for the top recruiting teams in the country. 
Click to expand...


Yes, the bottom of it's roster.  Those are the guys who are past the 105 and won't be around anymore.  We have already been adding more talent to our roster because we can get more than 85 guys the same compensation through NIL.  It would be foolish to think we're the only ones who've been doing that already.

 
hskrpwr13 said:
In a vacuum, would love to see it. Yet, if baseball loaded up on scholarships, which sports have to be dropped to account for title ix?
Click to expand...
None, hand out more women's scholarships too.  That is the point of this basically. More scholarships are being allowed in the Olympic type sports to make numbers remain equal. 

 
Mavric said:
I was responding to your comment about the big dogs being able to add 20 more blue chip recruits to their roster and that changing things considerably.  Nebraska has already added most of those 20.  I would be shocked if most others - at least the same big dogs - have not also done that already.  So your concern about the big schools stockpiling more talent has already happened and there won't be any significant change when the "limit" is changed to 105.  If anything, that is more of a limit than there is now - not less - because it is a hard cap whereas the "soft cap" of 85 really hasn't applied for several years now.

There has been some shift towards rewarding your best players and keeping the guys you want.  But that doesn't mean that the 86th player wasn't already getting scholarship-type money.  Nebraska has been giving that type of money to 10-15 guys past the 85 already (maybe more).  Other schools have been doing that as well.  All the big boys have already been stockpiling talent past 85.

Yes, the bottom of it's roster.  Those are the guys who are past the 105 and won't be around anymore.  We have already been adding more talent to our roster because we can get more than 85 guys the same compensation through NIL.  It would be foolish to think we're the only ones who've been doing that already.
Click to expand...
Concerning the bolded, I'm skeptical.  In theory with NIL scholarships don't mean as much because NIL can pay the value of a scholarship (and more) but has any 5* or 4* recruits walked on at one of the big schools? I don't follow recruiting that closely but I would think that a blue chip player taking NIL instead of a scholarship would have been big news.

 
Back
Top