College football 2020 offseason thread

Even it’s 100 players, that’s about 7% of the players in the league. 1 in 14. The teams will
manage.

 

https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/pac-12-players-covid-19-statement-football-season

The Pac 12 players' demands include protections against the Trumpandemic. That's good. Nobody should be required to play in what is likely to be an infectious environment. I'm also on board with commitments to social justice and Name, Image and Likeness representation. Ditto for six years of health coverage after the end of their playing careers. That's important.
But some of these demands are unlikely at best and absurd at worst.

* That Larry Scott take a "voluntary" pay cut. Note: If you're demanding it and he does it, it probably ain't voluntary.
* Pay cuts for "coaches." The manifesto doesn't say which coaches in which sports must see their salaries cut. Nor does it address the basic fact that neither the conference office nor the schools can do this. A deal's a deal. You want to see salaries decline? Good. They should decline. But you'll have to wait until existing contracts expire. And then the administrators will have to agree between them to make these reductions. Some experts call this collusion and an illegal restraint of trade.
* And end to "lavish facility expenditures." How many of these folks are enjoying the benefits of such lavish recruiting-driven facilities these days? Probably a decent number. Does this mean they're boycotting the facilities?
* "Distribute 50% of each's sport's total conference revenue evenly among athletes in their respective sports." Aside from being word salad, this one assumes a couple of things that can't be easily ascertained. The Pac 12 distributed an average of $29.5 million per member in FY 18, the most recent year available. The tax return doesn't say how much is attributable to any particular sport. Good luck determining how much each volleyball player gets.
* If the Pac 12 decides unilaterally that it's going to start paying players without NCAA approval, all recipients immediately become ineligible under NCAA rules.
* Six-year scholarships. So everybody deserves a free bachelor's degree, a free advanced degree and cash. Got it.
* 2% of conference revenue directed to financial aid for "low-income Black students" and community-service organizations. This is murky. I'm not sure the Pac 12 can set up a scholarship fund that specifically and exclusively awards scholarships to students of a particular race. Funds can establish preferences -- one UCLA fund grants first preference to African American women, for example -- but I don't think it's a slam dunk to say this one can be achieved legally. I could be wrong.

 

Moral of the story: Don't be a union taxpaying kicker.

 

So the Power Five is talking about thumbing their collective noses at the NCAA and going ahead with their own "fall championships," because football. And TV revenue. And who cares if the "student-athletes" happen to play a contact sport during a pandemic.

For those of you in the know, what's going on?

To me, the long-term ramifications could be extremely ugly. If they walk, why should the NCAA allow them to waltz back in for March Madness or the College World Series? Picking and choosing ala carte like a school cafeteria doesn't sound like much of a win-win situation for the NCAA.

If I'm Mark Emmert (and I'm not), this is where you have to make the Power Five make the hard choice: if you want to break away, don't knock on the door in March and expect to be greeted with open arms full of basketball playoff money.

It's the NCAA who has long-term agreements with CBS and Turner for March Madness, not the individual conferences. Those 65 schools represent an overwhelming majority of the marquee brands, but there are 250 D1 schools not connected to the Power Five. And something like three times more D3 schools in the NCAA than D1. How happy will Frostburg State or Occidental be if they find out they no longer get a cut of that slice of money pie because Clemson has to play Wake Forest this fall?

That's where the greedy big schools have always been able to bend the NCAA over a barrel.

And do the Power Five conferences really give a flying flip about non-revenue producing championships? Are they willing to fund say, track and field, volleyball or soccer out of their precious CFP money?

 

If the Power Five schools bolted they could probably make more money off their own basketball championship than they do now. In the last 10 years only eight non-Power Five schools have made the Final Four. Most of the basketball marquee schools are in the Power Five. Any post season tournament the Power Five held would be ab attractive television contract. While television revenues would be a lot less if the Power Five schools hold their own tournament the money would be split only about 63 ways instead of 300 ways.

 

I can't find the 400 page thread on conference realignment. So will I ask here. What is the likelihood Notre Dame stays in the ACC for football after this season?

 

The Forde article is below.

https://www.si.com/college/2020/08/02/ncaa-doubts-survive-explosive-weekend-power-5-breakaway

 

Until recently, they already could be fired for missing a field goal by having their scholarship taken away and getting cut from the team. It's only been the past few years, with the, cough * coincidental * cough,push for unionization, that scholarships could be guaranteed regardless of on-field performance.

Taxes? Big deal. So they get 60 percent of name and likeness money instead of the zero that they were getting for 110 years.

 

Absurd is an understatement.

 

Its almost like nobody here has ever heard of an opening negotiating price.

 

which is why I always giggle when I hear hammerheads say things like, “I don’t need no union because I negotiate mah own contract.”

And I’m sure you don’t leave Any money on the table when you do.

 

Have the rules changed on scholarships? I thought they could still be terminated at any time?