Football ROI is tied more to scheduling. Name schools in Peden and dates to maximize crowd interest. Its less about the on field performance than the perceived level. Unless the team is undefeated that particular year which would drive revenue.

Basketball ROI is tied more directly to earning NCAA credits and winning. There is no such thing as a NCAA credit in football and bowl payouts are a small source of income.

I mean, yeah. I am, broadly speaking, in favor of free markets and that certainly applies to labor markets. I think that people should be free to earn what they can earn based on the hard work they do, and can't really think of many highly regulated industries/countries/markets that suggest otherwise. The idea that player movement, scholarship offerings, and NIL money should be regulated and limited in order to maintain a very thin veneer of competitive balance amongst 130 FBS schools kind of seems nuts to me.

Given the structural differences and huge variability in resources that exists between an Ohio State and an Ohio University, creating one size fits all regulation seems grossly unfair to the individuals who generate the lion's share of the NCAA's revenue. That OU can't compete isn't new, nor is it something we're entitled to. I find the idea of taking money that somebody worked hard to earn out of their pocket because OU football fans want to continue living under the delusion that we're able to compete at the top level of college football to be pretty morally repugnant.

As for shutting football down, that may be a rational choice. But I'd suggest that there are many businesses that run loss leading divisions because they see value that's not reflected in revenue, and I think there's a compelling case to be made that that applies to college athletics. I'd lean towards believing it. What I don't think makes sense is dumping resources into competing at a level we can't. There are far more economically viable ways of running a football program than paying a bad coach 2x what you pay the President of the University.

Well you don't have to look very far for a prime, prime example. Quinn Ewers, the former OSU QB and 5 star recruit (and next Peyton Manning), sat out his entire senior year of high school to re-classify to take advantage of pre-negotiated NIL deals that were negotiated while still in high school (rumors were that it was close to a mil).

How'd that work out you might ask?

Played 2 snaps (both handoffs), was enrolled for 1 semester, and is now in the transfer portal to head back home to Texas.

Thanks Coach Day, smell ya later!

I’m not sure who you’re talking about who thinks we’re trying to compete at the level of the Ohio States of this world, particularly in the major sports. We have an athletic budget that is less than 1/5 of many major schools, have a dilapidated stadium build almost 100 years ago, pay our coaches in the lowest 10% of D-1 coaches, have made improvements to facilities of less than - what 10-12 mil in the last decade. Just how exactly are we dumping resources to compete at the highest level? We are making minimum investments to keep up mostly with our MAC brethren, not the Ohio States of this world. As to running a football program that’s pays its coach less than twice what the college pres is making, we’re doing that- he’s making 9% more, not double.

In today's economy, the value of a five year full ride is very high. The current system mandates that one-size-fit-all solution, where everyone gets exactly the same "pay", a full scholarship. Absolutely, there are players who are worth more than that, and there are also players worth less than that. Realistically, most, or all of those players who are "worth" more than the value of a scholarship are probably playing for a top team. Maybe the solution is to let Ohio State pay millions for their players, and at the same time, let schools like Ohio award partial scholarships to some players, to reduce their expenses to match their revenue. That would be the free market at work.

BTW, I agree that coaching salaries have gotten ridiculous. I think that's a function of, you can't pay the players, and you have money, so the one place you can use your money to improve results is on the coach. I think that pay for players will solve the over-paid coach issue, to some extent.

NIL is a nightmare for everyone particularly the biggest programs because they are so dependent on money flowing in and COVID turned off the spigot. NYC gets behind Rutgers and Chicago gets behind Northwestern. Both are beating Ohio State which they can't afford. One loss to Oregon and 30,000 empty seats at the horseshoe. How do they survive 8-4 seasons?

The shoestring programs have less to worry about. They'll compete up to their resource limits as they have always done. You won't see a big redirection of alumni giving at Ohio to athletics like you might at Alabama. What does it do the university mission? I would rather be outspent in athletics than to lower the academic mission.

He left because he signed those deals, and then the Texas legislature killed their own NIL bill for high school kids. He got huge publicity out of it, got paid and did what thousands of others have done. Left.

Will not be long until you see NIL in the high school level, discussions in the OHIO House last year on this.

Does he need another reason?

In general, any 18 year old who has already identified the career they hope to pursue and is offered 1 million dollars to leave high school early and practice said career at a much higher level, should do so.

There's this insinuation that taking money is bad, but it only seems to apply to college athletes. In what other scenario would we hold it against a person who accepts money in exchange for something they're very good at?

Suppose the kid were a computer whiz or a business genius. Would anyone complain if he were offered a million to leave high school early and go to college somewhere on a full ride (or even go to work)? People would say he's an "inspiration." And who would bring more attention -- and maybe money in the form of ticket sales and donations -- to the university: the computer whiz/business genius or the athlete?

This isn't quite an answer. It's a sentiment, and one I understand and agree with for the most part. But to be more specific about what I'm asking: why is it necessary to spend $600k on a football coach to accomplish all of the above instead of, say, $350k?

Given the level we compete at in the MAC, I'm not sure I see the justification of increasing salaries over the last 10 years.

It’s really pretty simple. When coaches get paid mega millions it draws into question the whole system and why we are where we are. We either have an amateur system where coaches are paid on the scale of a dean, or it’s something else and everyone has their hand out. It’s something else.

Its about staying ahead of the FCS in pay. The coach of NDSU is making $380k and the coach at JMU is making $425k. Albin at $510k is not exactly backing up the brinks truck when you think about what the bigger jobs in FCS pay. Ohio has a bigger stadium than both those programs.

https://jamesmadison.rivals.com/news/jmu-s-assistant-coac...

Boals is paid as if he coaches in the Atlantic 10 but that is more Ohio's level than an average MAC basketball program if you go by budget and success in the tournament.

Ohio athletic department is not way out of line on salaries considering the marketplace. UT San Antonio in contrast spend $28 million on their coach length of contract which is almost the total what Lane Kiffin is getting at Ole Miss. That is what you do I guess when a program moves up to the AAC? Ohio is paying Albin an entry level FBS salary already.