Too many teams. First thing I noticed was that Syracuse's
by VaDblDmr (2024-04-04 11:47:21)

In reply to: [The Athletic] Inside the college football ‘Super League’  posted by wiNDycityfan

Post Reply Return to Rock's House

president was part of this (along with Gee). Second thing is that revenue would not be evenly distributed. IMO, including haves with have-nots is how we got to where we are right now.
No doubt there are good ideas here, but it will end up being fewer teams than 70 and won't include a Syracuse, for example. That's why the B1G and SEC won't touch this.
I believe the answer is for the networks to directly pay players and take that money out of the money going to the conferences. Or I suppose you could have the conferences pay the players. But either way it needs to not be the individual schools.

If you take the schools out of the equation
by Irish Warrior  (2024-04-04 19:48:08)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

what's the point? It wouldn't become a glorified farm league for the NFL, it would literally become minor league football. You take the schools out of it and it becomes the UFL.
No, I'm referring to payment. The student athletes should be
by VaDblDmr  (2024-04-04 20:21:32)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

paid either by the networks or perhaps by the conferences. But they would still have to be students to be on the school's team and therefore paid.

I'm operating under the assumption that getting media revenue to the athletes is both the goal and the way to eliminate (and prohibit) the phony "NIL" that's going on right now. And I think eliminating the schools as the payor would help eliminate Title IX objections to having all male football players receiving substantially more benefits than any female athletes receive.