It would have to pass the house and senate and be signed by the president. Any differences between the senate and house version would have to be settled at conference committee.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Clearly
Is he pretending that?
lol with the “you would have cheated too in the situation”
It’s always telling when such counterfactual hypothetical defense mechanisms presents itself. Some odd desire to view this as an adjudication of moral high ground of individuals
Where are you seeing claims that he’s doing this out his good heart? Or even that P2 are doing things because they lack of ideals?
This is a weird take. He’s legit going out and talking about how he’s trying to save college sports? How is that not taking the moral high ground? He’s had several interviews where he’s talked about how he’s a champion for college sports, this can’t be new to you as you have responded to alot of those links
Their joint statement on Tuesday included items of concern in Cruz-Cantwell they previously supported in SCORE (e.g. Fed preemption of state laws) which made their statement BS. And of course, no mention in their statement of their obvious opposition to pooling, anti-expansion or anti-Super League which I am sure their PR and anti-trust legal team advised against.
This week has really opened the curtains of the Big 10. They are gutless wonders.
The only thing odd is taking this so personally, like some weird moral measuring contest.
Of course he’s saying that. Big difference between saying one’s setup is best for college athletics, with less collateral damage, than what you’re crafting up.
The fact your defense is the “you’d cheat too” is rather telling though. An admission that your position is likely not good for college athletics, just good for you
Make no mistake, everyone is looking out for their best interests. But not all individual best interests align with greater good equally
I DGAF about non-revenue or G5, it just so happens to align with the objective to preserve a 60+ school top level with fairly good parity
Regarding media rights pooling, I do not know whether a centralized model will ever come to pass. This is me just throwing out ideas. If it did, I would distribute revenue among all 138 FBS institutions based on three factors: average television viewership, fan engagement (attendance and alumni support), and historical competitive success.
These metrics could be evaluated over a three-to-six-year period to determine each school's placement within the structure. A minimum and maximum revenue-share distribution could be established through a collective agreement, while still allowing schools to move between tiers based on performance and media value.
To maintain regional interest and create attractive television inventory, each tier could be required to play at least one regional opponent from every other tier. In football, you would play 5 opponents from your group and 7 within your group/tier.
Total Annual Media Distribution in FBS: $6.38 billion
Media partners could include networks under Apple, Amazon, Netflix, ESPN, CBS, NBC, FOX, and The CW, creating a mix of broadcast and streaming inventory designed to maximize exposure and revenue.
While a model like this would require collaboration across all of FBS, it would tie media distribution more directly to the value each institution brings to the overall FBS product. Again, this isn't perfect, but it's as best I could draft up. If the media revenue payouts were right, it would give all parties a raise.
These metrics could be evaluated over a three-to-six-year period to determine each school's placement within the structure. A minimum and maximum revenue-share distribution could be established through a collective agreement, while still allowing schools to move between tiers based on performance and media value.
To maintain regional interest and create attractive television inventory, each tier could be required to play at least one regional opponent from every other tier. In football, you would play 5 opponents from your group and 7 within your group/tier.
| Tier | Schools | Annual Distribution per School |
|---|---|---|
| National | 20 | $100 million |
| Championship | 20 | $80 million |
| Contender | 20 | $60 million |
| Competitive | 20 | $40 million |
| Development | 20 | $20 million |
| Foundation | 38 | $10 million |
Media partners could include networks under Apple, Amazon, Netflix, ESPN, CBS, NBC, FOX, and The CW, creating a mix of broadcast and streaming inventory designed to maximize exposure and revenue.
While a model like this would require collaboration across all of FBS, it would tie media distribution more directly to the value each institution brings to the overall FBS product. Again, this isn't perfect, but it's as best I could draft up. If the media revenue payouts were right, it would give all parties a raise.
Any system that is going to work is going to put some kind of limit on players compensation. That's how you get competitive balance. Whether it's through legislation or collective bargaining it's going to happen. There are limits on NIL deals in pro leagues too.
Exactly. You can't really limit compensation without collective bargaining which athletes in the power leagues would be CRAZY to sign up for at this point.
What? Where did I say anything about “you would cheat too?”.
I’ve always said the P2 are looking out for their best interest and I don’t take any of this personally. I legit couldn’t care less if this gets passed or not, I, just like you, know that it has no chance of passing.
I’m not sure where you pulled any of these ideas from
If the NFL didn’t have salary caps and an anti-trust exemption, Patrick Mahomes would make more money.
The pearl clutching at limiting college athlete compensation is wild to me.
Yeah, once TV became a huge deal and media rights boomed, some players got the short end of the stick.
The NFL wouldn’t be the NFL if they had to deal with free agency every year with unlimited compensation.
College athletes should get paid more than they did in 2000… but I don’t feel bad for them if we have a salary cap in the low tens of millions.
The pearl clutching at limiting college athlete compensation is wild to me.
Yeah, once TV became a huge deal and media rights boomed, some players got the short end of the stick.
The NFL wouldn’t be the NFL if they had to deal with free agency every year with unlimited compensation.
College athletes should get paid more than they did in 2000… but I don’t feel bad for them if we have a salary cap in the low tens of millions.
Call me crazy but since the schools are getting giant checks from the tv networks, shouldn't the tv networks REALLY be the ones paying college athletes?
I don't have a problem with it either as long as it's legal. You can't just impose a cap without collective bargaining.
I have a huge problem with old dudes in suits sitting in coaches, league and network offices getting rich while the people actually playing the sport get pennies.
You’re smarter than that
That’s an analogy to demonstrate the root of your counterfactual what-if.
When your defense is what would occur if roles were reversed, you’re the one trying to make it about morality, because your position has the most collateral damage
They should have separated pooling & realignment, the mechanisms that determine revenue and threaten schools, from labor politics
The latter was always going to be contentious in any setup and across all conferences. Disagreements will cross most lines
The latter was always going to be contentious in any setup and across all conferences. Disagreements will cross most lines
Last edited:
A RevShare cap has been already legally imposed with the House Settlement. And legal NIL is uncapped.
Also, Cruz-Cantwell includes language that leaves open the possibility of athletes eventually unionizing with a CBA. And of course, most every other pro league with athlete CBAs have athlete salary caps and no caps on coaching salaries so Chris Murphy should perhaps rail on those leagues as well.
And if Chris Murphy is going spout out about this bill, then offer an alternative solution in doing so which he doesn't. And his claim that "all of the money" beyond RevShare goes to college administrators is nonsense given that a significant % goes directly to support non-rev sports.
I’m not even sure what you are referencing at this point.
Only morality argument I brought up was billionaires and that was when our puppet friend mentioned it
The B10 is always going to support the status quo and not do anything that takes away their advantage over the other leagues. They struggled beating the SEC on the field, then along comes unlimited NIL and their wealthier alumni base allowed them to overcome their largest issue, bringing in the great players from the South because of the cold climate in the North. Money talks, and once the schools could start throwing millions at a player, the weather and cold climate of the north, became much less of a factor in getting kids.
The same thing happened 60 years ago along race lines, the SEC would not accept black players or limited them, but that became a gateway for schools like MSU and others to bring those players in, and become successful.
The B10 will never voluntary give up their money edge, the other leagues would be better off trying to support the SEC and get them to come over to their way of thinking than the B10.
