Depends on what the deal is. If, for example, Miami had to pay at least minimum wage for athletic related hours, they could find the money for the football team. Could/would they be able to do that for all teams? Maybe not, but why should a football player have to prioritize other sports over their own self interests?
About 120 schools have been part of the Division 1A/FBS family of college football teams for almost 50 years. They aren’t outsiders. And they aren’t in any way akin to the XFL/USFL, etc.
What the Big 10/SEC is doing is tantamount to MLB jettisoning Seattle, Oakland, Arizona, Denver, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Kansas City, Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Tampa and telling them to form an alliance with the American Association.
3 Likes
What prioritization? Over the student fees that subsidize more than 50% of their budget? What’s the rationale for a football player that they deserve an even bigger piece of that pie so that they can get paid when their team doesn’t even generate half the revenue neeed to hit break even?
Thats what I’m saying; like at UAB, those kids have to know that the school looses money on them…
Wouldn’t they have too, Title IX’ically speaking?
If Miami (or most schools) operate football or athletics in general as a money making enterprise, then college athletics wouldn’t exist at most schools. They have the sports at a loss because they view them as having other benefits for the school beyond turning a profit.
Sure, at some point if the players wanted too much then it wouldn’t make sense to continue paying for the sports, but the line certainly isn’t that Miami/other schools can literally play nothing more before they’d need to shut the program down.
1 Like
No one really knows. Since you can’t pay players directly there’s no case law. It’s all speculation until it happens and lawsuits are filed.
2 Likes
Do any of those franchises lose money hand over fist and need massive subsidies from the likes of the Yankees, Cubs and Dodgers?
1 Like