NCAA Settlement

[AuH2O]

Letting high school players be drafted is kinda insane. They just aren’t physically ready to play in the NFL. There is a reason they require 3 years. The NFL doesn’t want to do the development they want ready made players.

They 100% care about development otherwise the product on the field will crater and they don’t want to absorb the cost of a developmental league when they get it for free.

There would be some, but it’s pretty tough to project a HS grad in football. And most positions would pretty much never have guys ready to play. Seems like drafting and stashing on a practice squad or extended roster would have to happen. They could open it up as another means to try to work around the antitrust thing. But I think no matter what a vast majority of development is going to happen in CFB.

 

[MeowingCows]

Letting high school players be drafted is kinda insane. They just aren’t physically ready to play in the NFL. There is a reason they require 3 years. The NFL doesn’t want to do the development they want ready made players.

They 100% care about development otherwise the product on the field will crater and they don’t want to absorb the cost of a developmental league when they get it for free.

I don't buy that at all. The NFL complains all the time at draft time about guys who are 22+ years old already being "too old" and that's a knock on their draft profiles. They'd do just fine plucking out the best 18 year olds on the planet. They don't need all of them, just the toppest of top tier ones, and the rest they want can sit on practice squads or whatever -- again, they'll adjust based on the opportunity presented. Every other major sport in existence already figured this out.

If I'm the NFL, I certainly don't wanna wait around while the colleges slowly build towards axing roster limits, scholly limits, paying kids more and more to stay longer, all of that is competitive to them (somewhat loosely, but still 'competitive'). The more self-destructive the NCAA gets in terms of actually being a regulatory body over the sport, the more trouble that will cause down the road for the NFL. The NFL has never had a better opportunity than right now to overtake the viewership space that college currently occupies. Plenty of fresh, new money to be made.

I don't buy the idea that the NFL and NCAA are effectively unwritten partners. They merely tolerate each other but aren't beholden to one another.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

I don't buy that at all. The NFL complains all the time at draft time about guys who are 22+ years old already being "too old" and that's a knock on their draft profiles. They'd do just fine plucking out the best 18 year olds on the planet. They don't need all of them, just the toppest of top tier ones, and the rest they want can sit on practice squads or whatever -- again, they'll adjust based on the opportunity presented. Every other major sport in existence already figured this out.

If I'm the NFL, I certainly don't wanna wait around while the colleges slowly build towards axing roster limits, scholly limits, paying kids more and more to stay longer, all of that is competitive to them (somewhat loosely, but still 'competitive'). The more self-destructive the NCAA gets in terms of actually being a regulatory body over the sport, the more trouble that will cause down the road for the NFL. The NFL has never had a better opportunity than right now to overtake the viewership space that college currently occupies. Plenty of fresh, new money to be made.

I don't buy the idea that the NFL and NCAA are effectively unwritten partners. They merely tolerate each other but aren't beholden to one another.

That’s the NBA you’re thinking of, NFL does not want those young guys out of high school. That’s they they set the limit at 3 years out of high school. That’s not an NCAA limit, that’s the NFL making that rule: so yeah you’re totally wrong on that one.

 

[MeowingCows]

That’s the NBA you’re thinking off NFL does not want those young guys out of high school. That’s they they set the limit at 3 years out of high school. That’s not an NCAA limit, that’s the NFL making that rule: so yeah you’re totally wrong on that one.

If I remember correctly, they put that limit in back in the early 1990s, and that move itself was a reduction from the previous rule of not allowing any undergrads in at all. Are the kids coming out of high school today the same fitness and skill level as kids back then? Abso-******-lutely not. Again, every single other major sport on the planet knows this. Basketball, baseball, soccer, hockey, ...

The only reason that limit still exists today is because they have a free farm system (that's currently unraveling at the seams) in colleges. I'm not the only person who says this. As soon as that farm system isn't useful to them anymore, it'll go away. They aren't attached to it, it's merely useful.

 

[CascadeClone]

The next really interesting ruling is going to be what the Dept of Ed rules on where Title IX sits in payments to athletes. These athletic departments are going to argue like hell that it doesn't apply.

I would assume they will say they give the same % of TV revenue to each sport, and that's a justification for why FB players get $250k and women's rowing gets BOGO coupons for donuts as Caseys's.

If some court decides it has to be the same absolute $$ per athlete, regardless of what the actual revenue coming in is for... then I could see some real chicanery, like sublicensing the school brand/logos to a private corp that then handles football, some weird workaround like that.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

If I remember correctly, they put that limit in back in the early 1990s, and that move itself was a reduction from the previous rule of not allowing any undergrads in at all. Are the kids coming out of high school today the same fitness and skill level as kids back then? Abso-******-lutely not. Again, every single other major sport on the planet knows this. Basketball, baseball, soccer, hockey, ...

The only reason that limit still exists today is because they have a free farm system (that's currently unraveling at the seams) in colleges. I'm not the only person who says this. As soon as that farm system isn't useful to them anymore, it'll go away. They aren't attached to it, it's merely useful.

That’s the whole point, the free farm system is extremely valuable that’s why they aren’t going to do anything to directly harm it. Comparing those other sports to football is pretty foolish, that’s why the NFL has that rule where the others don’t, kids out of high school are no where ready

 

[MeowingCows]

That’s the whole point, the free farm system is extremely valuable that’s why they aren’t going to do anything to directly harm it. Comparing those other sports to football is pretty foolish, that’s why the NFL has that rule where the others don’t, kids out of high school are no where ready

That "free farm system" is no longer free -- it's now competing with the NFL by paying its own players, and likely getting rid of its own regulations to keep players from moving on. These things don't help the NFL any. It's harming itself. There will be kids out there ready to play football, just like every other sport out there. Not many...but some. And any that pan out are a net benefit for the NFL when that time comes. I find it foolish to place football on a silly island in which no other professional sports lie -- every professional sport requires extremely specialized skills. The NFL isn't alone in this, however it is alone in draft policy...because it's currently useful for them. It's an archaic policy, not a new creation. They've just had no motivation to change it.

The NFL will trade away happiness of their college acquaintances every day of the week in order to get a few billy'$ more in revenue for Saturday games. That's a good motivator for change. Dollars run the show. College kids aren't more valuable later on than media dollars are right now.

 

[CloneLawman]

I've heard the vast majority of athletes in the portal end up transferring down, not up.

Depends on level methinks. ISU is certainly grabbing portal dudes who are moving on up (in basketball anyway).

 

[SolterraCyclone]

There is way too much emphasis being put on the NFL’s value of college football as a developmental league. Is it a little nice to have, sure, would that stop them from making millions, potentially billions, playing on Saturday, hell no.

I can’t say his opinion is the prevailing thought necessarily, but I listen to Mark Schlereth on Denver radio, who is well respected in the NFL community. He absolutely hates the college game. He fundamentally believes the CFB style is not translatable to the NFL at all. So, I’m certain he doesn’t put value on it as a developmental league.

 

[legi]

Has anyone ever explained why players wouldn’t be able to challenge the limit on how many years they can play college ball?

I would love for that limit to go away just to create even more chaos.

 

[ClubCy]

Has anyone ever explained why players wouldn’t be able to challenge the limit on how many years they can play college ball?

I would love for that limit to go away just to create even more chaos.

No but someone will….soon. If that happens that might be day I only watch the NFL/NBA. I can handle all the other chaos but I don’t need to see someone like Tim Tebow play 10 years at Florida.

 

[NWICY]

I know football drives the bus, but I wonder if schools will choose to cut the football scholarship limit back from 85 to something like 70. In the interest of keeping the playing field level, I'd think cutting football scholarships would need to be done conference wide.

Also, I worry the inevitable about increases in ticket prices and donation requirements. If there are significant increases, I'm afraid I will probably tap out.

I'm with you on the tapping out, I really enjoy watching the Clones and enjoy my tickets, but I'm definitely not a unlimited budget guy.

It'll be interesting to see the payouts on this will the 85th guy on the team get the same cut as the starters? They say all athletes so is a cross country runner worth as much as a starting qb. Oh well these are problems for someone other than me.

 

[Clonehomer]

I would assume they will say they give the same % of TV revenue to each sport, and that's a justification for why FB players get $250k and women's rowing gets BOGO coupons for donuts as Caseys's.

If some court decides it has to be the same absolute $$ per athlete, regardless of what the actual revenue coming in is for... then I could see some real chicanery, like sublicensing the school brand/logos to a private corp that then handles football, some weird workaround like that.

This will be an interesting court case that will have a huge impact on the NCAA. Title IX prevents you from discriminating based on sex. So with a set value of something like a scholarship, it’s easy to say that they need to have equal scholarships. But if you’re not paying the male athletes the same, does that argument hold?

 

[SolterraCyclone]

Very interesting conversation on the most recent Bill Simmons podcast (part 2) on TV deals and media rights from individuals who are very in the know on this stuff.

It starts out talking about the NBA TV deal, but it gravitates to the NFL. I encourage everyone who thinks the NFL will not play on Saturdays to protect CFB to listen to it. They lay out NFL thought process very well.

The impetus was discussion of reducing/adding games to schedules (specifically adding an 18th game to the NFL schedule). The conclusion was, it doesn’t matter what’s best for the sport, the players, the fans, etc. The NFL (and this can be extrapolated to CFB, NBA, etc.) will ALWAYS prioritize grabbing every last dollar that it can. It will explain away any drawbacks to those decisions it needs to, but if there is an extra dollar to be made, the NFL will do it with little regard to anything else.

The NFL will eventually play on Saturdays, because this is their mindset. I’m convinced of it.

They also do talk about CFB some as well.