Answering in here:
@AZ_ I may have missed if you responded directly to this topic (this thread has a lot going on) so I apologize in advance if you've already answered. Would you propose that all universities across the board pay athletes, including the mid-majors, FCS, DII, etc? Or would you think this should be more of a P5 thing? Should each "level" of college football have different guidelines?
Quick high level opinion:
1. All colleges and universities should open up the NIL for their players. This allows them to profit from jersey/merch sales and the students as a representation of the universities, while the players themselves are able to financially benefit as well.
2. Anything resembling a "salary" or compensation aside from NIL is likely a P5 only model. My personal thoughts are that players are entitled to part of the revenue from the multi-billion dollar broadcast/streaming rights, playoff and bowl games, conference championships, etc.
One can reasonably assume that each level of the NCAA can and will have different guidelines, which they do now as well for the most part.
I've worked in four different mid-major athletic departments, in ticketing mostly, so I will admit I am not too high on the food chain to know what all revenues look like. But at two of the FCS locations I've been at football just simply does not bring much revenue in terms of ticketing. Dirt cheap tickets, small venue, normally filling a third of the stadium. I don't know what the TV contracts looked like, but if the best case is a stream on ESPN+ I can't imagine there is a ton of revenue there either. Then obviously much of the revenue that does come in will go towards Olympic sports.
Attendance is becoming a secondary revenue driver for much of the P5 world.
IMO, I think the in-person model for watching sports is fit for a revolution as well. Bars/gambling establishments in the stadium, bringing more tech to the in-game concessions experience, etc.
As someone who similarly worked in sports for nearly a decade, they're incredibly antiquated from a marketing standpoint. Didn't realize it as much when I was working in sports, myself. It took me transferring over into start up company culture and that of publicly traded, Fortune 500 companies to see just how antiqated these models are.
They've historically been so successful, there is no need for change. Now that they're soon to be unable to take advantage of the mostly free labor of athletes, I think you'll see that begin to change.
The reason I ask is because I agree the vast majority of P5 schools can afford to pay their student athletes, probably even most of the G5 schools can at least provide a stipend of some sort. However, I do think there is still a place for the scholarship/amateur student athlete. There are countless stories of kids coming from low-income families that normally wouldn't be able to afford college, but they get a scholarship to play football at a Kennesaw State or a Newberry College. This scholarship could be live-changing and allow them to get a degree, go on to begin a career with a good paying job, etc.
America's appetite for sports and football will still exist enough to allow for these smaller schools to continue playing with profits not being a part of the conversation.
Where I think the money should come from is through the enormous streams of revenue that purchase a huge stake in the game, which is through the P5 conferences as they're currently constructed.
I'd like to hear your thoughts on if you think there should be different guidelines for each level of college football. Is there room at any level for the scholarship/amateur student athlete? Thanks!
Definitely! Small school football will largely be unchanged, players are still going to compete for D1 offers the same way they always have, and I wouldn't be surprised if the training and competition for those spots translates down to the lower levels.
We're scouting athletes in grade school now, knowing that they could potentially have a chance to earn money while playing in college is only going to provide an incentive to work harder, be a part of a youth sports team and build their skills at a younger age.
All of that will benefit the talent at lower levels over time. All of that will create more job opportunities for trainers and coaches at the youth level to have a positive influence on kids lives.
Youth sports kicks ass with regards to childhood development and preparation for life. I'm all for providing a positive benefit that trickles down to all levels.