NCAA Football Is Now Openly Pro Football

And Canadian U football is now much more than second rate as evidenced by the number of US
Div 1 schools recruiting our best players to finish their education there once the player shows top drawer ability. Think what Can U's could do with the funds derived from a subscription network they own ? Even better have govt's increase "initial" funding to upgrade the U sports programs. And let them play in CFL stadiums where even selling 10,000 seats would fill their coffers.. and preserve the Canadian game..

Well this matter heats up predictably to match the weather now. Here's a slew of fine articles for updates.

Here's a great load of steaming hot BS from Alabama again. Yeah right, Nick Saban the guy who benefited as much as any in recruiting under the under-the-table system to date, wants to have a say in changes. Saban and his advocates can piss off too now that he is no longer in the elevated catbird seat even before his teams won those championships including via ESPN in recent years. Now isn't this HUBRIS by Nick Saban!

" I don't dislike name, image and likeness. I'm all for the players," he said. "I want our players to do well. Our players made over $3 million in name, image and likeness. I'm all for the players being able to do as well as they can and use their name, image and likeness to create value for themselves. We have a great brand at Alabama, so players are certainly -- their value there is going to be enhanced because of the value that our brand can help them create." Saban supports players making money off of their names, but it's the lack of consistency that bothers him about the current state of college athletics.

Uh, sure, okay Nick, nobody who is not associated with the University of Alabama believes you! :roll_eyes:

Oh let's be real on why these talks are not going anywhere. With the key schools already gone, the sum of the parts will be even less than each of them separate now.

Any opportunity on this sort of move was years ago, and that ship has sailed.

Get ready to play in second division college football for far less but for the remaining schools who can flee in the coming seasons when like many, I feel that we will have a 32-team professional youth football league and it may involve also some recently former college players who are playing in the spring football leagues:

The Notre Dame plot thickens. For the critics especially from the likes of the Big Ten, I remind them "It's the money, stupid."

Notre Dame's media take will soar now from even above the $22M annually they earn via the current NBC deal, which premiered in its first edition in 1991 when I was in school there, to perhaps $75M annually. And that is before bowl games and any tie-in extras such as with any given new league coming!


Alabama doesn't have deep enough pockets to go toe to toe with Texas and Texas A&M - there is now more parity in the SEC than before and Nick doesn't like not having an overwhelming advantage.

Also good luck trying to make make rules that say how much money grown adults can make in regards to NIL - get ready for court challenges on that one for the next 30 years.

1 Like

It was just a matter of time before the players got uppity and started asking for money - the fake amateurism façade is long dead and buried let the games begin.

1 Like

And here's a development that creates more problems than it solves.

Last season, the undergraduate transfer rule was liberalized.

An athlete already can transfer freely twice in his or her career, and there are only four years of eligibility unless one receives a medical or hardship waiver for one of his seasons. For football, medical or hardship waivers are usually only granted if less than half the scheduled games are played.

Here's a take from an attorney on the matter, for the young status quo works just fine:

"To say now you can transfer without penalty is going to be a disaster … ," said attorney Tom Mars, who has worked on several high-profile waiver request cases. "Having been a strident leader for the rights of college athletes, I never anticipated they would go this far."

The NCAA this week merely codified the landscape that had developed around the portal and the one-time transfer rule. Those undergrads who wanted to transfer more than once merely applied to the NCAA for a waiver citing extenuating circumstances. More often than not, the NCAA granted those waivers knowing, in the end, it didn't want to face a lawsuit.

The number of adverse and unintended consequences, not all of which are going to be known until perhaps two seasons into this college football free agency, is going to outweigh the benefits to all but perhaps some of the shifty players.

1 Like

I like the part where the guy said it was the coaches who have caused this by abusing the process for decades.


How The Big Ten Ends Up With The Rest of the Pac 12 Schools In California

So via Dennis Dodd of CBS Sports, whom I believe is the finest writer on matters of college football expansion and beyond, there is some chatter about the Big Ten adding four more teams from the faltering Pac 12.

I don't buy the chatter as presented, but I do offer this angle on California that is being overlooked to some degree.

Last week, Governor Gavin Newsom launched an inquiry into the matter of UCLA's decision given that UC-Berkeley, the other public school of the state university system with also a very old and storied athletic program including football, was left out in the lurch.

Both of these public state universities in California get their share of money from the same pool of taxpayer funds from the state after all, so Governor Newsom has a strong legal point in the collective interest of the State of California in any revenue proceeds of public institutions.

Governor Newsom also has heavy political clout in California, as does his dominating Democratic Party, along with likely even many a supportive California Republican on this front.

Here's what I see. The matter of UC-Berkeley's legally entitled share of the benefits gained by UCLA will be pressed by Governor Newsom, and the Big Ten will not be fighting the accession of UC-Berkeley but also will add other schools so that more than this matter is resolved.

Which unversities? Stanford would be a lock with the addition of UC-Berkeley so as to make for 18 teams in the Big Ten such that California becomes property of the Big Ten for its biggest college football programs and all the media value that goes with that exposure.

I'm not sold on the chatter on Oregon and Washington given that I do not see them as adding as much value let alone they do not have a legal claim as does UC-Berkeley, but as Dodd implies, there is plausibility in the idea that if the Big Ten goes to 18 teams anyway, the Big Ten would at least consider two more so as to make it 20 teams.


The road to the Super Leagues of College Football is underway.

Canadian Universities should take notes and at least revisit the Northern 8 format for the sure sake of getting the best team matchups and a tv deal.

Don't want to hear anything about Canadian universities just sticking to academics only as they have it.

Just need to build on sports to compliment the academics they have and retain Canadian athletes as they end up going to the US for scholarships.

1 Like

I wouldn’t be surprised at the addition of Oregon (just for Nike) and Washington (just for the Seattle market).
At this point, nothing would surprise me anymore.
Heck, they added Rutgers just to tap into the NYC market.
They can do whatever they want. I stopped watching Power 5 football several years ago and largely replaced it with the CFL.

1 Like

College football is being held hostage by politics.

With all that money bantied about, are any players seeing any residual benefits from it?

And no I don't want to hear about basket weaving as a course, as that might be an insinuation of a certain demographic which is not necessary true.

Players are being exploited though.


I agree on all fronts with you. There are more fans like us out there than honestly counted down here in the US. We are only into pro football as it has been known in the past.

Now like you I am a past fan of college football and gave it up a few years ago when it was all too obvious it was hijinks between the schools that followed most rules and those who put up all the appearances each with varying cover by the corrupt NCAA, the "bowl committees," the conference heads, and ESPN.

When there is perhaps a reformed, fully professional, premier college stadium league of 32 or 36 top programs, then I may take interest again much as I have had in the CFL since 2009 and may take in any successful XFL.

We have had quality pro football traditionally from July through January and now it runs from June through February as the XFL kicks off in February 2023.

Quality pro football year-round with the CFL, NFL, premier college league, and XFL would be enough for me and many fans.

1 Like

I wonder about Cal and Stanford getting into the club - do they bring $100 million usd worth of value to the Big10? Because that is the payout they would be getting - Cal doesn't care about football and Stanford doesn't draw well - I don't know what changes in that regard if they both end up in the Big10.

I totally agree that Oregon and UW don't bring value to the Big10 definitely not $80 to $100 million each. I would expect them to stay on the sidelines.

As I noted above, the lead driver for Cal-Berkeley is the leverage via the laws and politics of California. Now to be fair the law at hand is not unique to California for public schools.

Rather than to fight off Cal-Berkeley for any in the Big Ten leadership who so desire, for they do have a strong claim given UCLA's addition and the same legal status in California, it would be far easier to just add them and their area rival Stanford.

Over the years the interest in football and the quality of teams at Cal has come and gone, but I do not agree with all that they don't care. In most years, it's a big deal there when they play their frequent opponents especially from California.

Well, according to Dennis Dodd of CBS Sports, matters are at a standstill now perhaps with regards to the following:

  1. The Big Ten has backed off adding more teams now.
  2. The Pac 12 has been under the hot spotlight with questions about its future, but for now no schools are going to leave.

I add one caveat via California. As noted in the previous posts, I see the matter of Stanford and Cal-Berkeley arising again in the offseason simply because Cal-Berkeley has a strong legal case in getting its share via any gains by UCLA plus all the backing of the governor and most of the state politicians, if not also federal, in California.

As a public university if UCLA were compelled by law to allocate a share of its gains derived from joining the Big Ten with Cal-Berkeley, the Big Ten might simply not want that situation arising and it would be more advantageous simply to add Cal-Berkeley and its cross-town and top rival Stanford. Both schools already do have a global and national profile well beyond athletics of course.

I can see the Big10 dropping UCLA but as I said before I don't think there is a heck of a lot of "Value" in either Cal or Stanford or both as a group. Those two schools have luke warm fan bases on good years here is the bottom of the Pac12 for attendance for the end of the last decade 9. Cal 10. Stanford 11. Oregon State 12. Washington State.

Cal got Lawyered up and might get a piece of the pie but I don't see the Big12 shelling out 100 million to those schools just because the Big10 got drug into court. Maybe the Big10 cuts UCLA loose and finds someone else but I can't imagine it being either of those two.

Cal and Stanford in my opinion are about 3 notches above the USFL Alabama Spring football league. No one tunes into watch Cal play even Cal fans don't want to watch Cal play. Could be wrong but I am not seeing it.

1 Like

At Cal they are fair weather fans. Stanford fans on the other hand do turn out around the nation. Notre Dame has played Stanford frequently over the years, and in the prior century it was almost every year for a very long time.

The reality if the Big Ten cuts UCLA loose according to your view, they have to cut another team and with USC there that is NOT happening. UCLA would have to be replaced by another team because the odd number of total teams is absolutely not going to happen voluntarily for the Big Ten or any conference.

Again, given the legal costs and the branding spectacle and a bit of a public relations mess that could be avoided simply with a small expansion, I see the Big Ten adding Cal and Stanford.

Also of note is that the schools added are not merely added, as you continue to state, on the basis of solely the value of football to the TV deals. Certainly that is a principal factor, but that is not the sole deciding factor.

The conference considers the school's profile nationally beyond football and sport, and those factors contribute value as well.

i think it is funny that now that the NCAA is paying football players and allowing athletes to earn money, they can actually be correct when they call them student athletes. there is now an actual incentive to stay in college and get an education. by exploiting them and making rules that they have to stay/go to college was just making a mockery of the educational system.