(10-05-2019 11:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-05-2019 10:43 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-05-2019 08:50 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-05-2019 10:40 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-05-2019 09:34 AM)TripleA Wrote:  So boosters and shoe companies don't pay players under the table now?

The last thing in the world we have in college football right now is competitive balance. Only about 10 teams have a real chance at a championship. It's not much different in basketball.

You can make a argument that some schools are cheating in the current system and not enough of the cheaters are being caught and punished. That doesnt mean the rules dont make sense. Despite having laws against credit card fraud and identity theft, tons of people commit these offenses and get away with it every year. Thats hardly an argument for making credit card fraud and identity theft legal. Just because every violator is not caught and punished doesnt mean the rules are not largely performing the function they were designed to perform.

Regardless of cheating, the imbalance is there, and always has been. It's worse now than ever. This might actually help.

Yes, the California model could help close the G5 - P5 gap, especially for the upper crust G5. Too bad many G5 fans can't see it.

I don't think so. The California law is for image usage only. The best players will want to go to the schools with the largest fan base reach and the broadest TV markets because that is where they will be able to monetize the value of their image the best.

So the Cali law will help USC, Notre Dame, Alabama, Michigan, Ohio State, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Florida State and other schools with national draw far more than it would help Clemson, Auburn, Michigan State, U.C.L.A., Oregon, etc.

The very last people it will help is the G5. Why? The G5 don't have national draws. Some players would make some money in their regional markets. But they wouldn't make nearly as much as one sporting the uni from one of the national brands.

It's not pay for play like the New York proposal which would actually apportion revenue to all collegiate players in the state from the combined pot of all of the state schools, which would absolutely screw Syracuse and Buffalo.

The best way for the G5 to benefit from any of this is if there is a flat salary cap established for all FBS players. That way their scholarships are as valuable in goods and services and cash as anyone else's would be.