menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Here It Comes
Page: 1 of 1
mail
person
giacomo
1/20/2023 11:49 AM
https://sports.yahoo.com/california-could-lead-another-ch...

California is proposing a 50% revenue share for college athletes. It was only a matter of time.
mail
person
Ohio69
1/20/2023 1:35 PM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
https://sports.yahoo.com/california-could-lead-another-ch...

California is proposing a 50% revenue share for college athletes. It was only a matter of time.
Sigh...

This is gonna be a wild ride.

I wouldn't want to be a div 1 non-revenue generating sport coach in California. Cuts are coming big time if this is passed.
mail
OhioCatFan
1/20/2023 3:05 PM
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
https://sports.yahoo.com/california-could-lead-another-ch...

California is proposing a 50% revenue share for college athletes. It was only a matter of time.
Sigh...

This is gonna be a wild ride.

I wouldn't want to be a div 1 non-revenue generating sport coach in California. Cuts are coming big time if this is passed.
Don't think the Big Farm in Cowtown would like this in the Buckeye State one bit.
mail
person
L.C.
1/20/2023 4:34 PM
Direct pay will be here soon, and then scholarships must die. It can't just happen in football, though. The same thing needs to happen in each and every sport. That will kill them, of course, but it must happen. I predict that the end result will be to eliminate the nonsensical category of "college sports", and replace it with two things, a minor league system, as exists in baseball, and club sports in college, with no revenue. Will that make it a better, fairer, world? No, but it will make it a different one.
mail
person
giacomo
1/20/2023 9:53 PM
I don’t know where this is going or what would be the best model. I do know that when coaches were paid like professors, the scholarship method worked. Now the money is much greater and coaches are the highest paid at many universities by many multiples. Something had to give.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
1/21/2023 4:48 AM
I'm curious if anybody has a handle on the math here. I know there are a few posters who understand the ins and it's of college athletics well.

But the proposal applies to programs where revenue is greater than 2x money paid out in scholarships yearly. Quick and dirty Google search shows 85 football scholarships and an average value of ~36k. Is my interpretation right that a program would only need to bring in ~$6.5m to qualify?

That said, revenue shares in the vast majority of cases apply to net revenue. Would be curious to see more on the language there.
Last Edited: 1/21/2023 4:51:39 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
BillyTheCat
1/22/2023 10:38 AM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
https://sports.yahoo.com/california-could-lead-another-ch...

California is proposing a 50% revenue share for college athletes. It was only a matter of time.
Sigh...

This is gonna be a wild ride.

I wouldn't want to be a div 1 non-revenue generating sport coach in California. Cuts are coming big time if this is passed.
Don't think the Big Farm in Cowtown would like this in the Buckeye State one bit.
Nah, here is the thing, if something like this would go down, schools at that level would probably embrace it. Why you ask? Because then like the NFL, revenue potential becomes the No.1 recruiter and not $100 million dollar tan mahal’s called locker rooms. Even been to NFL training facilities or locker rooms? Many of them pale in comparison to college facilities. Most NFL teams use a bubble for indoor facilities.
mail
person
colobobcat66
1/22/2023 2:04 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
https://sports.yahoo.com/california-could-lead-another-ch...

California is proposing a 50% revenue share for college athletes. It was only a matter of time.
Sigh...

This is gonna be a wild ride.

I wouldn't want to be a div 1 non-revenue generating sport coach in California. Cuts are coming big time if this is passed.
Don't think the Big Farm in Cowtown would like this in the Buckeye State one bit.
Nah, here is the thing, if something like this would go down, schools at that level would probably embrace it. Why you ask? Because then like the NFL, revenue potential becomes the No.1 recruiter and not $100 million dollar tan mahal’s called locker rooms. Even been to NFL training facilities or locker rooms? Many of them pale in comparison to college facilities. Most NFL teams use a bubble for indoor facilities.

They care about revenue, but they care even more about being able to keep most of it and not sharing. I don’t see that.
mail
TWT
1/22/2023 5:27 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
https://sports.yahoo.com/california-could-lead-another-ch...

California is proposing a 50% revenue share for college athletes. It was only a matter of time.
Sigh...

This is gonna be a wild ride.

I wouldn't want to be a div 1 non-revenue generating sport coach in California. Cuts are coming big time if this is passed.
Don't think the Big Farm in Cowtown would like this in the Buckeye State one bit.
Nah, here is the thing, if something like this would go down, schools at that level would probably embrace it. Why you ask? Because then like the NFL, revenue potential becomes the No.1 recruiter and not $100 million dollar tan mahal’s called locker rooms. Even been to NFL training facilities or locker rooms? Many of them pale in comparison to college facilities. Most NFL teams use a bubble for indoor facilities.
That's nice but here at OU we don't have a billion dollars of TV revenue coming in to pay the players. At most it might get to the point where G5 conferences have more revenue to pay than non-G5 mid majors and separation will grow outside of football.
Last Edited: 1/22/2023 5:28:51 PM by TWT
mail
OhioCatFan
1/22/2023 11:31 PM
colobobcat66 wrote:expand_more
https://sports.yahoo.com/california-could-lead-another-ch...

California is proposing a 50% revenue share for college athletes. It was only a matter of time.
Sigh...

This is gonna be a wild ride.

I wouldn't want to be a div 1 non-revenue generating sport coach in California. Cuts are coming big time if this is passed.
Don't think the Big Farm in Cowtown would like this in the Buckeye State one bit.
Nah, here is the thing, if something like this would go down, schools at that level would probably embrace it. Why you ask? Because then like the NFL, revenue potential becomes the No.1 recruiter and not $100 million dollar tan mahal’s called locker rooms. Even been to NFL training facilities or locker rooms? Many of them pale in comparison to college facilities. Most NFL teams use a bubble for indoor facilities.

They care about revenue, but they care even more about being able to keep most of it and not sharing. I don’t see that.
Thanks, colobobcat66, that was the point I was trying to make.
mail
person
giacomo
1/23/2023 10:32 AM
That is very true. The elite programs offered crazy upgraded facilities and various perks and the best coaches as non monetary compensation because they couldn't pay the players. Now that is moving in another direction.
mail
person
L.C.
1/23/2023 11:22 AM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
That is very true. The elite programs offered crazy upgraded facilities and various perks and the best coaches as non monetary compensation because they couldn't pay the players. Now that is moving in another direction.

The NFL may not have ultra nice facilities, but they don't seem to scrimp on coach salaries:
https://sportscriber.com/money/nfl-coaches-salary /

Right now, the highest P5 coaches are in the same range as the highest NFL coaches:
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/college-football-head-c...

It's reasonably to expect that, at the high end, P5 salaries may drop to well under the NFL salaries as more money goes to players. How much, if any, effect that has on the lowest paid coaches, such as Albin, remains to be seen. This is from 2016, but if you adjust these for inflation, FCS salaries are not far below the bottom of G5, so I don't think the bottom salaries will fall much, if at all.
mail
TWT
1/23/2023 2:37 PM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
That is very true. The elite programs offered crazy upgraded facilities and various perks and the best coaches as non monetary compensation because they couldn't pay the players. Now that is moving in another direction.

The NFL may not have ultra nice facilities, but they don't seem to scrimp on coach salaries:
https://sportscriber.com/money/nfl-coaches-salary /

Right now, the highest P5 coaches are in the same range as the highest NFL coaches:
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/college-football-head-c...

It's reasonably to expect that, at the high end, P5 salaries may drop to well under the NFL salaries as more money goes to players. How much, if any, effect that has on the lowest paid coaches, such as Albin, remains to be seen. This is from 2016, but if you adjust these for inflation, FCS salaries are not far below the bottom of G5, so I don't think the bottom salaries will fall much, if at all.
FCS salaries underpin the floor of the market for G5 salaries. There is a sweet spot for the MAC in terms of salary range where they pay enough to get excellent coaches but not over do it for a low revenue producing athletic department.

The next CFP and NCAA contracts could require half of the money goes to the players. FCS conferences will be in real trouble then relative to the G5 because anyone impressive for those ranks would be smart to move up for a G5 salary. Definitely upperclassmen in the FCS ranks that would be attractive in the MAC.
mail
person
L.C.
1/23/2023 2:52 PM
I forgot to post the link in my post above. Here are FCS salaries from 2016:
https://www.aseaofred.com/scanning-fcs-coaches-salaries /

This information is dated, and I'm sure that, just as G5 coaches have seen their salaries rise faster than inflation, the same is true for FCS coaches. Ignoring outliers, a top decile FCS coach was making about $250k in 2016, which would be about $315k today in constant dollars. If it has risen faster than inflation, as I expect, they are probably making more like $350-400k today.
mail
person
Ohio69
1/26/2023 8:53 AM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
That is very true. The elite programs offered crazy upgraded facilities and various perks and the best coaches as non monetary compensation because they couldn't pay the players. Now that is moving in another direction.
Wish I could bold that "because they couldn't pay the plalyers" part. Interesting thought. I assume OSU/Clemson/Alabama types won't flinch.

I wonder what the IRS or DOL will think about all this. If you are paying them, are they not employees? Do the tax limits on scholarships for employees then apply? Unemployment? Workers compensation? Do the athletes at public schools in California fall under state civil service law? Public pensions? Health care and other benefits?.....
Last Edited: 1/26/2023 8:53:50 AM by Ohio69
mail
OhioCatFan
1/26/2023 10:52 AM
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
I wonder what the IRS or DOL will think about all this. If you are paying them, are they not employees? Do the tax limits on scholarships for employees then apply? Unemployment? Workers compensation? Do the athletes at public schools in California fall under state civil service law? Public pensions? Health care and other benefits?.....
Shh. . . you're not suppose to ask these kinds of questions. This is free market capitalism at its finest. The concept of student-athlete is dead. Rejoice! Onward and upward!
Showing Messages: 1 - 16 of 16
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)