2025 NCAA Football Thread

[gehringer_2]

and I still wonder how much anyone is going to want to tune in once the paradigm shifts from 'worlds finest phys ed majors' to just another attempt at an NFL minor league. I know, people will say it can't happen because reasons, but let's just say I won't be waiting to pony up for the next greatest "college sports media" investment opportunity.

[Hongbit]

17 hours ago, buddha said:

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football/article/with-college-sports-in-limbo-and-key-issues-coming-to-a-head-the-spotlight-is-on-the-sec-its-going-to-get-heated-130018106.html

basically college sports is going to be dead soon.

the sec and big ten are already in discussions to break away.  stuff we've been predicting for a while here.

the big ten and sec make the most money.  they dont want to keep subsidizing the other leagues and eventually they wont.  theyre already in talks with private equity firms to break away.  

people ask why the other leagues would allow the big ten and sec to run everything now so it benefits them?  because they could leave and form their own league and leave the other leagues with very little.

i wonder when notre dame will wise up and join up with the big ten?

The NFL would make the perfect partner.    They should all come together to create the next iteration of the NFL’s player development program.  F the Big 12, ACC,  G5, and especially Notre Dame. 

Edited May 28 by Hongbit

[buddha]

6 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

and I still wonder how much anyone is going to want to tune in once the paradigm shifts from 'worlds finest phys ed majors' to just another attempt at an NFL minor league. I know, people will say it can't happen because reasons, but let's just say I won't be waiting to pony up for the next greatest "college sports media" investment opportunity.

it has to have some affiliation to the university, no matter how tenuous, or people really wont care.

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

it has to have some affiliation to the university, no matter how tenuous, or people really wont care.

right, that is the key - but how close will be close enough? I guess we're going to find out.

[Deleterious]

If I'm the NFL I would unleash my lobbyists and get the law change so they can start broadcasting on Saturdays before December. 

 

[Deleterious]

 

[Deleterious]

That new MSU AD looks like a guy you meet at a party who is going to talk about Bitcoin all night. 

[Deleterious]

Someone misplayed their hand.

 

[gehringer_2]

22 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

Someone misplayed their hand.

 

He had his chance to stand for Academic Freedom, instead he gets his freedom from academia....

Edited June 3 by gehringer_2

[buddha]

he wasnt DEI enough for michigan but was too DEI for florida.

hilarious.

[GalagaGuy]

Ono somehow managing to piss off both sides and ending up jobless is the funniest damn thing I've seen in a while.  

[gehringer_2]

Everyone got it wrong all the way around. Ono obviously didn't understand what he was walking into in FLA, but the Regents screwed it up as well. When Ono was hired they knew he wasn't really a fit for what UM wanted long term, but they needed to move quickly to cauterize the bleeding after the Schlissel fiasco. But he was supposed to be a transitional guy - a place holder. What ever possessed them to extend him instead of letting him ride off into the sunset with a "Thank-you very much",  and looking for the leader with the political fit they wanted long term would be a very good question to ask Esqs Bernstein and Acker. Because when la merde a frappé le ventilateur with Trump Admin V2.0 it became all too plain to the majority on the Regents that had just extended him (and most of the UM Community) that he was not the guy anybody wanted.

Edited June 4 by gehringer_2

[Hongbit]

As expected, this happened almost immediately after the judge approved the settlement.

 

[Deleterious]

So it begins.

 

[gehringer_2]

27 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

So it begins.

 

LOL - Maybe my reading comprehension is just gone, but this article appears to contradict itself from paragraph to paragraph, including statements from both PSU and UCLA that they are not involved in any equity arrangement with Elevate immediate following the paragraph that appears to report they are. I guess I just don't care enough about where colleges sports is on its way to  to try and parse any sense out of it.

Quote

Dubbed the College Investment Initiative, Penn State and UCLA are the first two clients, signing eight-figure private capital deals with Elevate, sources confirmed to On3. Elevate touted two signings when it announced the multi-million dollar capital fund on Monday.......

(and then..)

.....In a statement to On3 on Monday, Elevate said it isn’t “announcing any clients associated with this investment initiative, those two schools are Elevate ticket operations clients.” UCLA stated in an email to On3 that it is exploring expanding its partnership with Elevate, and is not part of the College Investment Initiative.

“Elevate serves as our partner in ticketing strategy and operations,” Penn State athletic director Pat Kraft said in a statement. “To clarify, our relationship is strictly limited to these services, and we have no affiliation or involvement with any private equity firm or fund.”

 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 12:30 AM by gehringer_2

[Deleterious]

Looks like everyone is denying the report.

[gehringer_2]

3 hours ago, Deleterious said:

Looks like everyone is denying the report.

still probably only a matter of when, not if.  I don't know how the last couple of seasons went for them but I remember a couple of years ago the program at UCLA was reported to be in pretty dire financial shape. I assume the B10 revenue share must have helped.

Edited Tuesday at 04:42 AM by gehringer_2

[buddha]

this will act as a de facto salary cap and now all the boosters will spend their time circumventing that cap just like they used to spend their time paying guys who couldnt get paid.

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

this will act as a de facto salary cap and now all the boosters will spend their time circumventing that cap just like they used to spend their time paying guys who couldnt get paid.

It will be funny if it ends up that some possibly large number of players who get paid amounts larger than the NFL minimum in college end up not being drafted. Not that there would be anything wrong with that at all, I just think it would be some kind of ironic. I suppose it's only a matter of degree different from a guy on a full ride who doesn't get drafted, but still...

Edited Tuesday at 02:22 PM by gehringer_2

[Hongbit]

28 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

It will be funny if it ends up that some possibly large number of players who get paid amounts larger than the NFL minimum in college end up not being drafted. Not that there would be anything wrong with that at all, I just think it would be some kind of ironic. I suppose it's only a matter of degree different from a guy on a full ride who doesn't get drafted, but still...

I know I’m a broken record on this but big time college football only exists because the NFL lets it.  It’s currently advantageous for them as it has been for the past forever years but the moment it becomes a problem is the when the NFL will create its own developmental league for players out of high school.   NCAA football will be doomed if that ever were to happen.  

[gehringer_2]

35 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

I know I’m a broken record on this but big time college football only exists because the NFL lets it.  It’s currently advantageous for them as it has been for the past forever years but the moment it becomes a problem is the when the NFL will create its own developmental league for players out of high school.   NCAA football will be doomed if that ever were to happen.  

as long as NCAA players are forced to age out of the league, the NFL won't have a problem. When one of them who is getting paid who isn't drafted goes to court to keep his 'job', that's when the problems could start. That has to be one of the reasons the colleges want Congress to codify outline of the House settlement into black letter law.

One possible good outcome would be guys realizing that they can get paid another year for grad school working harder on actually getting a good degree.

Edited Tuesday at 03:29 PM by gehringer_2

[buddha]

5 hours ago, Hongbit said:

I know I’m a broken record on this but big time college football only exists because the NFL lets it.  It’s currently advantageous for them as it has been for the past forever years but the moment it becomes a problem is the when the NFL will create its own developmental league for players out of high school.   NCAA football will be doomed if that ever were to happen.  

people will care about college football as long as its associated with the college.  the minute that stops - or the minute the nfl decides it wants a "developmental league" - no one will care.

and the nfl isnt going to take on that expense.  

[gehringer_2]

51 minutes ago, buddha said:

people will care about college football as long as its associated with the college.  the minute that stops - or the minute the nfl decides it wants a "developmental league" - no one will care.

and the nfl isnt going to take on that expense.  

So in this era of re-examination of long held practice, who decides eligibility can only be 4 seasons plus a red shirt? One can very honestly spend 5-6 yrs working on a PhD. Who can argue a doctoral student is any less a student or affiliated with his university than an undergrad? So if I'm going to spend 10 yrs at the University, and I happen to be 6'5" 295 why shouldn't I be able to play for more years? In fact just as many years as the average NFL career (which I believe is 5 yrs for non QBs). Sure it seems absurd, far fetched, but what are the criteria for what's on the table and what isn't right now? More athletes ending up in academia would probably be good for it!

Edited Tuesday at 09:21 PM by gehringer_2

[buddha]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

So in this era of re-examination of long held practice, who decides eligibility can only be 4 seasons plus a red shirt? One can very honestly spend 5-6 yrs working on a PhD. Who can argue a doctoral student is any less a student or affiliated with his university than an undergrad? So if I'm going to spend 10 yrs at the University, and I happen to be 6'5" 295 why shouldn't I be able to play for more years? In fact just as many years as the average NFL career (which I believe is 5 yrs for non QBs). Sure it seems absurd, far fetched, but what are the criteria for what's on the table and what isn't right now? More athletes ending up in academia would probably be good for it!

i dont think that's far fetched at all.  in fact i think i've posted something like that before.  why is eligibility limited at all except by agreement of the schools?  does some player go to court to challenge that as some sort of restraint on trade?

 

[Hongbit]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

 

and the nfl isnt going to take on that expense.  

Thats the case at the moment. They will if they can profit much more than the expense and have total control over their player development. 

It would take less than 5 years for college football to essentially die if the NFL were to start a developmental Saturday league for the top 18-22 year olds that had no affiliation with college.   High end High school football would quickly pass it in interest too.