ReZyNeZy wrote:Just read up on the court settlements from earlier yesterday. Some things I like, and some things that become very concerning in the future. I like the idea of a salary cap and an effort to combat pay for play and booster money. On my eyes the boosters were a major issue of the old NIL format. I like the idea of being able to offer scholarships to all athletes under a sport. The salary cap was a much needed addition if this was going to become mainstream. While 22 mil is a bit high for a lot of schools. It puts a limit on the big booster schools.
However, as most articles (and some posters mentioned) non revenue sports are effectively dead. There is no room for them anymore when money is going to be put towards paying athletes. Also, allowing the power conferences to develop rules for themselves is just going to alienate the non power conferences even more. Keep in mind these power schools only have 1 sport in mind where players play with a brown ball, and it isn't the spherical one. Making decisions from a purely football standpoint is what got the NCAA in this mess, buy handing over the regulation to the very schools who started the problem is going to cause trouble down the line.
The real problem isn’t NIL. Or pay for play. Or boosters.
It’s the universities and athletic departments themselves. When they make TV deals in the billions of dollars, play in stadiums that seat over 80,000 people, and make millions of dollars on merchandise and licensing deals any idea of this stuff being “amateur” is a joke.
They want all the money but don’t want to give any of it away. They use the guise of “education” “student-athletes”, and “equality” - as if those are things member schools REALLY want.
