How much are we worth?

#26
#26
The govt could and should stop funding them anyway but that's another discussion.

I'm not in favor of the govt getting their paws on much but that ship has sailed, docked in outer space, and is never to be seen again but the Founders never intended the Feds to oversee 99% of what they do today.
Most public universities couldn't survive without federal money unless they had enough wealthy supporters to carry them or tuition was increased to the point few could attend. And I'm not saying the government could keep them from using players that receive NIL money.....they just wouldn't be eligible for federal funding if they did.


Why Colleges Need Federal Funding—and What Happens When It Stops
 
#27
#27
Most public universities couldn't survive without federal money unless they had enough wealthy supporters to carry them or tuition was increased to the point few could attend. And I'm not saying the government could keep them from using players that receive NIL money.....they just wouldn't be eligible for federal funding if they did.


Why Colleges Need Federal Funding—and What Happens When It Stops
Not going there in this forum but I'll just reiterate my belief that the govt that governs least governs best and no one, person or govt, gives money without strings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KHVol and Remy
#28
#28
I’m not sure how many times this has to be said. Evidently folks can’t read or don’t bother to study the subject before commenting. Can’t cap NIL. Period.
Didn't say anything about limits or even the participation of NIL activity. I just said the government could stop funding the colleges if they continued to allow them to participate.
 
#29
#29
Didn't say anything about limits or even the participation of NIL activity. I just said the government could stop funding the colleges if they continued to allow them to participate.
My response was to the guy in post #6:

“This is why NIL must be capped like the NFL’s salary cap or it’s going to get insane.”

But I’m not sure the government can or will ever cap NIL. Everybody is free to earn money on their Name, Image And Likeness. It’s called free market. Now IF college sports gets an antitrust exemption like the NFL has and they go to employment contracts (as in the NFL) then limits (caps) could go into effect on those contracts. Not a lawyer but that’s my understanding. Too many people still conflate NIL contracts with employment contracts.
 
#30
#30
I’m not sure how many times this has to be said. Evidently folks can’t read or don’t bother to study the subject before commenting. Can’t cap NIL. Period.

You cannot cap NIL - but you can create eligibility rules, and schools can agree to adhere to those rules. If Congress restores that authority through congressional action, and the schools agree to participate by those rules, then you can effectively restore the functional order of how things were before this mess started.

Players will be free to accept whatever NIL they want. The college just can't use anyone who doesn't meet the requirements in collegiate competition.

Which again, is how it was before any of this started. Players have always been free to accept whatever NIL they want. "But their NIL would be worthless if they weren't playing for a college!" Hmm ... really? Well that doesn't sound like NIL at all ... and there's a nasty can of worms that nobody wants to eat lurking behind that thought ...
 
Last edited:
#32
#32
You cannot cap NIL - but you can create eligibility rules, and schools can agree to adhere to those rules. If Congress restores that authority through congressional action, and the schools agree to participate by those rules, then you can effectively restore the functional order of how things were before this mess started.

Players will be free to accept whatever NIL they want. The college just can't use anyone who doesn't meet the requirements in collegiate competition.

Which again, is how it was before any of this tarted. Players have always been free to accept whatever NIL they want. "But their NIL would be worthless if they weren't playing for a college!" Hmm ... really? Well that doesn't sound like NIL at all ...
Yes, IF and WHEN Congress gets involved then some limits and caps can be put in place if an antitrust exemption is given. And that’s going to open a big can of worms too. Lots to consider if it goes the route of player employment contracts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voltopia
#34
#34
Yes, IF and WHEN Congress gets involved then some limits and caps can be put in place if an antitrust exemption is given. And that’s going to open a big can of worms too. Lots to consider if it goes the route of player employment contracts.
Again, my statement had nothing to do with the amount player could receive or even the continued existence of any NIL program. No school would be denied using NIL paid players and no player would be denied the right to make a billion dollars a year. The only thing that would change is the schools that allowed their student athletes to participate in those programs would be denied federal funding..... for the school.... not the athletic programs. It will never happen but that's the simplest law that could be passed to stop this craziness.
 
#35
#35
Sounds a little high for Texas..........here's one from CNBC. Also has us at #7 with 1.18B and Texas at #1, but only has them at 1.4 billion. I'd say this is a little closer to the actual numbers and would think we're pretty competitive with top athletic schools. Granted now you have corporations and entities that want to buy teams so who knows how it'll look in 2 or 3 years.........I miss the 80's/90's something awful.

That shows us 7th in the nation, 4th in the SEC. The WSJ one had us 7th in the SEC. Big difference in the two.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NATHAN05
#36
#36
Government at any level needs to stay out of intercollegiate sports.
Unfortunately, only Congress can provide the antitrust protection required for the NCAA or any organization to control payments, salary caps, etc AND maintain amateur status.

I've been saying since Alston that the elite programs should be spun off of the schools as pro sports businesses and lease the facilities, logo, etc and do away with the actual student athlete ruse.

If they do that, they can use an "implied Antitrust Exemption" like most pro leagues do to collective bargain, cap salaries, draft players, etc etc.

It cuts Congress out but only if they go the employee - employer route and become pro teams. It's my personal opinion that schools should not own pro sports teams but others feel differently about that.
 
#38
#38
It will get worse. Money coming in has actually increased. No one is incentivized to make things better. Athletes are getting richer, programs are getting richer, agents are getting richer. Until the money gets threatened nothing will change
 
#39
#39
Again, my statement had nothing to do with the amount player could receive or even the continued existence of any NIL program. No school would be denied using NIL paid players and no player would be denied the right to make a billion dollars a year. The only thing that would change is the schools that allowed their student athletes to participate in those programs would be denied federal funding..... for the school.... not the athletic programs. It will never happen but that's the simplest law that could be passed to stop this craziness.
Don’t hold your breath about the federal government doing anything that makes sense. If a simple rule could have been passed to fix it, they would have done so already. Nothing about this is simple.

And I don’t believe tying federal funding (to the schools) to the use of players receiving NIL would ever fly. Frankly I’m not even sure Congress wants to even get involved in this mess. Will believe it when I see it.
 
#42
#42
Bingo. Each team is capped at 10-15 million. Solves everything
You can’t cap NIL. The Supreme Court already ruled on this. As long as collectives can sponsor a kid for a specific team, there will be no salary cap. You can unionize all you want to, but the Supreme Court ruled that you can’t limit a person’s earning potential on NIL.

We already have revenue sharing that is limited. It’s the NIL that makes the spending cap useless.

As long as the power conferences all band together, the NCAA is holding on for its life and is afraid to make a bold declaration. It’s up to the power conferences to decide if NIL is on their best interests before we can actually have a salary cap and to limit NIL.
 
#43
#43
You can’t cap NIL. The Supreme Court already ruled on this. As long as collectives can sponsor a kid for a specific team, there will be no salary cap. You can unionize all you want to, but the Supreme Court ruled that you can’t limit a person’s earning potential on NIL.

We already have revenue sharing that is limited. It’s the NIL that makes the spending cap useless.

As long as the power conferences all band together, the NCAA is holding on for its life and is afraid to make a bold declaration. It’s up to the power conferences to decide if NIL is on their best interests before we can actually have a salary cap and to limit NIL.
The pro leagues use collective bargaining agreements between players and teams to prohibit teams from using NIL deals to avoid salary cap issues. In short, the NFL/NBA will (and I think has) come down on teams for shady NIL deals which are designed to overcome salary cap problems for a team.

That's why collective bargaining, which means essentially employee status instead of student-athlete status, is what college athletics needs to control NIL by agreement, which the courts allow.
 
#44
#44
An article in today's online WSJ shows UT sports valuation at $1,114,000,000, 7th in the SEC.

Texas was rated highest at $2,197,000,000 so we're almost estimated to be worth $1 billion less than Texas.

A&M, LSU, UGA, Bama and OU all rated higher than UT.Auburn just below us.

Sorry, can't link the article or copy any of the text.
Should be a little higher considering our fan base and TV ratings
 
#45
#45
It will get worse. Money coming in has actually increased. No one is incentivized to make things better. Athletes are getting richer, programs are getting richer, agents are getting richer. Until the money gets threatened nothing will change
Probably correct. Unfortunately, for CFB, there will probably be no meaningful action taken to structure better until fans get "less interested" and ratings drop

... but I don't think that's happening for a long time, b/c for the decade+, it's largely been the club of Bama, UGA, Mich, OSU, Clemson, LSU and a few others sprinkled in for the playoffs. Now, we've got 12 team playoffs, going to 16, and upstarts all over the place, like IU, Ole Miss, Texas Tech, etc...with new heightened interest, and 9 game SEC slates...all good stuff for CFB. I tend to think don't worry about NIL, but focus on boundaries/rules on transfers, which I think they can probably legally have a bit more structure around w/o getting into legal battles. Could be entirely wrong.
 
#46
#46
Unfortunately, only Congress can provide the antitrust protection required for the NCAA or any organization to control payments, salary caps, etc AND maintain amateur status.

I've been saying since Alston that the elite programs should be spun off of the schools as pro sports businesses and lease the facilities, logo, etc and do away with the actual student athlete ruse.

If they do that, they can use an "implied Antitrust Exemption" like most pro leagues do to collective bargain, cap salaries, draft players, etc etc.

It cuts Congress out but only if they go the employee - employer route and become pro teams. It's my personal opinion that schools should not own pro sports teams but others feel differently about that.
I been saying it’s eventually gonna spin off like a Club team that pays the school a licensing fee to use their logo and name
 
#47
#47
I been saying it’s eventually gonna spin off like a Club team that pays the school a licensing fee to use their logo and name
It should, IMO, but I think all the revenue generated will keep the school from doing the right thing and getting out of the pro sports business.

At least we're luckier than most schools because Randy Boyd has experience with pro franchise ownership and can hopefully steer UT in a good direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheVolsFrog
#50
#50
Sounds a little high for Texas..........here's one from CNBC. Also has us at #7 with 1.18B and Texas at #1, but only has them at 1.4 billion. I'd say this is a little closer to the actual numbers and would think we're pretty competitive with top athletic schools. Granted now you have corporations and entities that want to buy teams so who knows how it'll look in 2 or 3 years.........I miss the 80's/90's something awful.

Texas has a 47 billion dollar endowment. The next biggest endowment in the SEC is A&M at 20 million. No one else has over 10. Texas has way more money than us and everyone else in the conference.
 

Advertisement



Back
Top