Penn State set for big recruiting advantage from house settlement
Penn State may be in for a major competitive advantage beginning next season.
Article: Penn State set for big recruiting advantage from house settlement
- Thread starter heckmans
- Start date
Like it or not, this is not 1960
It is disgusting to think that we could be paying teenagers $160k per yr. to play football, half of them not even seeing the field, plus a free $150k education. So they leave school with no debt and $500k just for playing football. Thought boosters were bad. Wait til you see the leaches that latch onto the program now. It will be a very corrupt system very quickly.
The universities are being forced to pay players for the revenue that they bring to the university. Not a novel concept. When millions of dollars are being made off of other people’s work, eventually the people doing the work will want to get paid. How is that disgusting.
The "leetches" reach all the way into youth sports: travel teams/ select showcases/ personal trainers etc
Most realize that being a pro is a very long shot, but a college scholarship, even at the Dll level seems more attainable. Throw in at least $500k cash and it will only put even more pressure on kids- and fuel the industry which even stretches into hotels with all you can eat breakfasts.
As a high school teacher- kids are already distracted from their educations by social media and dreams of being "Influencers" Adding a significant financial reward for big revenue college sport athletes will likely create more focus on sports vs school.
I don't feel great about this- but understand the math.
Thank you NCAA for mismanaging...
If they're receiving a salary, then I assume they can be fired when they don't produce.
Back in our era, the 'influencers' who made the greatest impact on my life were my parents (1 may be capable, but you really need both), my teachers and my coaches.
And I'm quite confident that the 'influencers' that our young people aspire to be are not of the traditional educator variety.
Also, perhaps I was naive growing up believing that all of the teachers and educators in our country were operating off of 'the same sheet of music'. To be honest, having quality educators teaching 'their truth' has unsurprisingly led to a further fragmentation of our society.
I hate NIL BUT this change is good for us. Many schools we want to compete with are spending that much in their collective. [Oregon, Texas, tOSU, and now UM] At least with most funds rolling through the Universities it will be slightly more regulated and we will compete.
a couple other points
. obviously the kid who never sees the field won't get the $160k/year, conversely the studs will get much more than that.
. Now to defend the kids. Doesn't PSU stand to get paid near a billion dollars over the life of the latest TV contract? And that was before the CFP $$. So these kids are bringing in literally billions to the University. IMO they should get their share.
PSU has never been able to compete with the big bagmen of yesteryear. They still won't. PSU's competitive advantage is and has always been it's culture. Rip, Joe, and now CJF have something pretty unique [not completely unique]
In my view we are probably 3 players from being number 1 in the country.
. a stud receiver to replace Liam or Fleming
. a stud interior DL
. a stud coverage LB or 5th DB to slow down the middle of the field slants
That's pretty darn close. Hopefully we can figure out how and where to spend the money to get us over the hump. I think CJF and company will do that.
It's great to know that some genuine halfwits will be earning far more than their freshmen English professors. Even the "student-athletes" who deserve academic scholarships will earn more as 18-year-olds than some of their 35-year-old instructors.
Three cheers for the tail wagging the dog!
Three cheers for the tail wagging the dog!
I get the idea of how youth sports gets more corrupt each year. In our day [20 years ago now] our son played a high level club soccer in Atlanta. We traveled to Dallas, Tampa, D.C. Memphis et al for tournaments. summer camps at Clemson and needless to say it got pretty expensive. the straw the broke for me was the advent of the "Olympic Development Program" ODP. Yet another "season" between spring and fall. i remember saying to my wife if there were any potential olympians you would know immediately. Sure enough a year or two later we were in Raleigh for a tournament and there was a kid from a team near D.C. that had a 13-4 year old playing with the U18 year old group. He was small but still clearly the best player on the field. From memory I think it was Freddie Adu who went on to become an Olympian.
But I digress. How did the NCAA mismanage this? The NCAA is a terribly run group
IMO but I don't know how they could have handled this one.
I cannot imagine where this is all going in the near future. It's becoming clear that Congress will have to step in since the NCAA and the member institutions and their conferences are either powerless or unable to gain consensus on guardrails. The growing talk about Private Equity (see "Mark Lasry") actually buying football programs is a whole new paradigm in money procurement and payment. We are not far from college QB contracts far exceeding those in the NFL, save the few for the elite players like Burrow and Mahomes. We are also not far from a large majority of Power conference players declaring their "free agency" after each season, in essence playing on one year contracts until their eligibility is exhausted.
The only solution is Congress, where the will of the Courts and those who would challenge the status quo will be brought to heel. Not optimal but I don't see another way.
You have to produce revenue to justify your salary. Unfortunately, a top notch English professor does not produce as much revenue for the university as a top notch athlete. That is the nature of our society.
That being said, while tenured English professors are important to our society and educating our youth, it is a relatively low stress job with terrific job security. They will make their salary for the rest of their careers while college football players will be paid for 4 years. Professors are highly intelligent individuals who like academics but do not want the stress and competitiveness of the real world jobs that could potentially earn higher income. They get paid what their job is worth in the free market.
IMO, the "job" of being a college football player over the 4 year period that they are playing college football is more stressful and difficult than being a professor. The English professor will never have 106,000 people attending their class and millions more watching them on television and judging and criticizing their performance on a weekly basis.
Agreed, this has nothing to do with what the NCAA has or hasn't done. The only argument you could make is that they should have come up with this solution on their own much earlier.
But, the vast majority of us are watching and attending games to watch “Penn State Football” and not individual players. Like 98 percent of the athletes that suit up for PSU have no intrinsic monetary value as football players or as brand marketers. These young men have value in these areas because they are a member of the Penn State Football team. Some guys can fill seats… a Barkley or McSorley etc, but I’d venture half the people in the seats at Beaver Stadium can’t name more than 2 or 3 current players.
Last edited:
FWIW, I don't think this means that "most funds" will flow through the university. This means that PSU will need to divert a portion of revenues (tix, concessions, TV) previously used to fund the AD, to paying athletes.
On top of that, players are entitled to be compensated for the name, image, and likeness, which, despite being meant to allow endorsements, has meant that boosters can pay a kid to be on a roster.
On your 2nd point (bolded above), it will be very interesting to see how universities take the "upto $20.5M" and disperse it. The article says that PSU is anticipated to devote 82% to football, which is more than most. UNC, Duke, and Kentucky, for example will devote a significant percentage to basketball. Then you wonder, as things ebb and flow, what pressure there will be from Olympic sports. Does PSU devote anything to wrestling, for example? This could get very interesting across the board. A small school, for example, could probably take a modest amount of money and focus on a non-revenue sport and become a power house. You could even see a school like Rutgers, for example, just take their B2G pay check and devote an outsize portion to basketball. They're not going to compete in Football, so why throw good money at trying to be around .500? Pay 8 good basketball players well and create a high-performing team.
Finally, and please tell me what I'm missing, but I can't see how every single university isn't forced to cut to non-revenue sports.
PSU currently uses FB revenues to pretty much fund the whole AD.
Football schollies go up by 20 (roughly $800K-$1M for football) and many other sports have increased schollies.
If PSU diverts $20.5M to pay players, that's roughly >$21M less to operate other teams. Something has to give, no?
I don't think anything has to give. I believe if you look at the TV revenue for PSU for the last 10 years and then look at the projected revenue for the next 10 years and then add in whatever PSU's share of CFP money from the B1G is that amount FAR exceeds $20.5 million per year. That doesn't mean non rev sports won't suffer. But they don't need to and would be a convenient excuse.
You got me thinking so I looked it up. The B1G contract that ended in 2022 was $2.6 billion for 6 years. [roughly $433 million per year divided by number of schools. I think that is about $30 million per year. The new contract is $1.15 billion per year for 7 years. With 4 new schools that is $64 million per year. then the CFP is $1.3 billion per year. If the B1G gets an average of 3-4 participants that is approx. $400 million more or $22 mil per school. that takes PSU share from the B1G from $30 million per year to $86 million. [doesn't count local rev or B1G network rev]. Plenty of room to pay $20.5 million plus keep any non revenue sports you want
Penn State set for big recruiting advantage from house settlement
Penn State may be in for a major competitive advantage beginning next season.www.psucollegian.com
sickening or no, this is college football. If you want PSU to be competitive, if you want PSU to be a top 10 team, this is good news.
And truth is, PSU makes what, $10m per home game in ticket revenues, plus something north of $50m in TV revenue share from the B1G.. It's north of $100m a year? To pay the players $20m of that money doesn't seem unreasonable. What else would they do with the money? They're already paying the coaches a ton.
This lets PSU compete in a NIL world with billionaires sponsoring teams. PSU doesn't seem to have the billionaire but it does have the fan base and the TV ratings.
I feel a ton more comfortable with colleges directly paying student-athletes than asking for third party folks to ostensibly use NIL to "pay for play". At least this would be above board
Just wait for the first kid that gets hit with a warrant for tax evasion as they didn't properly hire an accountant to do their taxes......giving that much money to an 18 year old who doesn't understand so they listen to shady partners/friends, in a few years we will have some bad stories of kids broke, owing lots of money or potentially having to defend an IRS audit.....
Schools need to almost hire a financial advisor on the staff to help with these issues.
Schools need to almost hire a financial advisor on the staff to help with these issues.
It is the uniform and school that bring in the money. Put these same kids on a professional non-NFL team named after whatever city one prefers and the revenue generated would be pennies on the dollar compared to CFB.
That could not be further from the truth. How many people would pay to see a PSU team that goes 2-10 every year and never competes for the post season?
Last edited:
you are both right or wrong. It is true a 2-10 PSUisn't going to get many eyeballs or butts in the seats. By the same token a Nick S or Drew A isn't going to get many butts or eyeballs playing in some semi pro league. We have many NFL spin offs as failures to demonstrate that. Fans are loyal to the school not the player. [just look at the portal. yesterdays hero is tomorrows enemy and vice versa. But a school needs players to maintain a high level of interest.
They need each other.
They need each other.
The schools attract loyalty much the same way the Pittsburgh Steelers or Dallas Cowboys attract loyalties. However, make no mistake, 106,000 people are not going to Happy Valley on Saturdays solely to see the campus. If the players stink, attendance falls. If future NFL players no longer play college football, attendance falls and college football fails. The players and the football game they are playing are the product that attracts 106,000 fans to HV on Saturday, not the school. If Drew A transferred to Pitt, Pitt would be a better football team and we would see a lot less yellow seats at Acrisure Stadium. The NFL teams recognize this and pay the players accordingly. Why do we expect differently from colleges?
Last edited:
I think people believe this arrangement ends what we currently think of as NIL, pay for play through collectives or direct marketing arrangements. I have yet to see anything that suggests pay for play goes away. What is to stop Barstool from buying a QB for Michigan in the future? This rule just adds more money to the pot for the “haves”. The only saving grace for us is that we appear to one of the “haves” in this new arrangement.
The timing of this -- agreement set to be final on April 7 -- suggests PSU will not be able to use football money for the current transfer wave. So they will be at a real disadvantage trying to land, say, a top receiver.Penn State set for big recruiting advantage from house settlement
Penn State may be in for a major competitive advantage beginning next season.
exactly. I would think that player/school contracts will be drawn up..similiar to the Pro's...some may have guaranteed money , hopefully the schools include clauses around player off field behavior as they are representative of the schools while attending ...stuff like that..Football/Basketball of course are major money generators for Athletic programs..and ultimately help fund non generating sports...that may be short lived though as overall margins are reduced because more $$ going to players..of course...curious on how these media rights deals..or Stadium rights deals add to the overall bottom line for the schools as well...but bottom line..it you are not a top tiered program...you have no chance..just can't compete...last thought though..what if Harvard woke up..started tapping into their $53.2 Billion endowment fund...whoa Nellie !
That’s not the point. Clearly the team needs to be good and competitive to generate excitement and keep fans engaged. We need to play the game to construct a roster that’s competitive. But, nearly none of these kids have any legitimate NIL value. It’s all being propped up in a “house of cards” collective and is not sustainable.
Some sort of congressional action or collective bargaining needs to happen and will happen. Players should get some reasonable cut of revenue and have the ability to profit from legitimate NIL deals. But, except for a select few, kids are getting “famous” by playing for PSU or OSU or Alabama and not the other way around.
All current P4 players could move to a football minor league. All current G6 players could fill in at all the P4 schools, and the P4 schools would be infinitely more popular than the minor league. We would barely miss the current P4 players and would all be just as juiced about the playoffs, even though the “best” 18-22 years olds aren’t playing college football.
I agree with respect to NIL money. It is the school, not the actual value created by the player, that is driving the payment of NIL money. What is being talked about in this thread is the revenue sharing of the schools with the players, which is very different than the NIL money.
Once again the portion of our fan base that wants us to be Princeton in 1908 has reared it's hideous head
Seriously, just leave. We don't want or need you any longer.
Seriously, just leave. We don't want or need you any longer.
I don't understand. The article says: "The settlement would allow for revenue sharing, meaning universities will be allowed to directly pay players through athletic revenue instead of relying on third parties and collectives. Won't players still be allowed to pursue NIL money on top of university revenue sharing?Penn State set for big recruiting advantage from house settlement
Penn State may be in for a major competitive advantage beginning next season.
Also:
- Does each player get the same revenue sharing money or can the university divide it as they wish?
- Does it make sense to keep the roster well below 105 so there is more money per player?
- Can we still have walk ons that get no money?
Nothing with NIL has changed.
Players will get paid by the university AND they will still get a bag from NIL collectives and any other source that wishes to write a check.
Regarding "splits" it says that PSU is expected to dedicate more to football than others, so that would mean it's up to the university.
$20.5M is for all sports as the university sees fit. UNC will give a lot to basketball, for example. Will PSU give any to wrestling?
No different than your average starting QB in the NFL making more than his coaches. Or any of the 21/22 yr old 1st round draft picks making more than any of their coaches.
And that’s exactly why I won’t attend anymore Psu home games this year a ticket for UCLA game 200 dollars and that’s nor anything else, I remember 40 dollar ticket days didn’t matter who they were playing $$$ that’s all it is now
Spoken like a prof or an administrator who thought the money should go into their pocket but not the kids who actually did the work.
Similar threads
