[Farm93]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

[Farm93]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

[JustAnotherFan]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

Holding the CFP while no other sports were able to compete for a national championships seems like it would be a suicidal move for the future of college football.

[JustAnotherFan]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

Holding the CFP while no other sports were able to compete for a national championships seems like it would be a suicidal move for the future of college football.

[teejers1]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

Holding the CFP while no other sports were able to compete for a national championships seems like it would be a suicidal move for the future of college football.

Why do you say that?

We already know that football is "different" from other collegiate sports inasmuch as they foot a lot of the bills.  So why would a CF championship - only one of its kind - be that out of line?

But more fundamentally, would you have said the same thing if colleges across the land thought soccer sufficiently safe to compete and hold a championship, and THAT was the only sport to hold a college championship?

[teejers1]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

Holding the CFP while no other sports were able to compete for a national championships seems like it would be a suicidal move for the future of college football.

Why do you say that?

We already know that football is "different" from other collegiate sports inasmuch as they foot a lot of the bills.  So why would a CF championship - only one of its kind - be that out of line?

But more fundamentally, would you have said the same thing if colleges across the land thought soccer sufficiently safe to compete and hold a championship, and THAT was the only sport to hold a college championship?

[JustAnotherFan]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

Holding the CFP while no other sports were able to compete for a national championships seems like it would be a suicidal move for the future of college football.

Why do you say that?

We already know that football is "different" from other collegiate sports inasmuch as they foot a lot of the bills.  So why would a CF championship - only one of its kind - be that out of line?

But more fundamentally, would you have said the same thing if colleges across the land thought soccer sufficiently safe to compete and hold a championship, and THAT was the only sport to hold a college championship?

Football is the money sport. The athletes want compensation. The colleges want them to be unpaid amateurs. It's a violent sport with serious long term health risks. The schools claim players are students first. If football holds the CFP while everyone else is doing zoom classes there is no way that college football exists beyond 2030. Asking about soccer is completely missing the point.

[JustAnotherFan]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

Holding the CFP while no other sports were able to compete for a national championships seems like it would be a suicidal move for the future of college football.

Why do you say that?

We already know that football is "different" from other collegiate sports inasmuch as they foot a lot of the bills.  So why would a CF championship - only one of its kind - be that out of line?

But more fundamentally, would you have said the same thing if colleges across the land thought soccer sufficiently safe to compete and hold a championship, and THAT was the only sport to hold a college championship?

Football is the money sport. The athletes want compensation. The colleges want them to be unpaid amateurs. It's a violent sport with serious long term health risks. The schools claim players are students first. If football holds the CFP while everyone else is doing zoom classes there is no way that college football exists beyond 2030. Asking about soccer is completely missing the point.

[teejers1]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

Holding the CFP while no other sports were able to compete for a national championships seems like it would be a suicidal move for the future of college football.

Why do you say that?

We already know that football is "different" from other collegiate sports inasmuch as they foot a lot of the bills.  So why would a CF championship - only one of its kind - be that out of line?

But more fundamentally, would you have said the same thing if colleges across the land thought soccer sufficiently safe to compete and hold a championship, and THAT was the only sport to hold a college championship?

Football is the money sport. The athletes want compensation. The colleges want them to be unpaid amateurs. It's a violent sport with serious long term health risks. The schools claim players are students first. If football holds the CFP while everyone else is doing zoom classes there is no way that college football exists beyond 2030. Asking about soccer is completely missing the point.

Dude, CF may not exist beyond 2030 for only the health reasons you cite.
Why you think having a CF championship this year would hasten its demise is based on . . . what?  

Let me ask you this, then:  do you ascribe to the theory that Pac 12 and Big 10 canceled fall sports because the players were making demands?  I think that is without basis, but perhaps you think otherwise.

[teejers1]

The updated doesn't impact the CFP since that is not an NCAA championship.

I am not sure the NCAA will really be able to hold the fall sports championships later in the academic year, but I am pleased that non-Pac-12 schools will not be able to win MWP, WVB or WSoc NCAA team championships this fall while Stanford athletes are not able to compete.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/ncaa/n...all-sports

Holding the CFP while no other sports were able to compete for a national championships seems like it would be a suicidal move for the future of college football.

Why do you say that?

We already know that football is "different" from other collegiate sports inasmuch as they foot a lot of the bills.  So why would a CF championship - only one of its kind - be that out of line?

But more fundamentally, would you have said the same thing if colleges across the land thought soccer sufficiently safe to compete and hold a championship, and THAT was the only sport to hold a college championship?

Football is the money sport. The athletes want compensation. The colleges want them to be unpaid amateurs. It's a violent sport with serious long term health risks. The schools claim players are students first. If football holds the CFP while everyone else is doing zoom classes there is no way that college football exists beyond 2030. Asking about soccer is completely missing the point.

Dude, CF may not exist beyond 2030 for only the health reasons you cite.
Why you think having a CF championship this year would hasten its demise is based on . . . what?  

Let me ask you this, then:  do you ascribe to the theory that Pac 12 and Big 10 canceled fall sports because the players were making demands?  I think that is without basis, but perhaps you think otherwise.

[Mick]

Football is the money sport. The athletes want compensation. The colleges want them to be unpaid amateurs. 

If you're speaking about club sports, I would absolutely 100% agree.  If you're talking about intercollegiate, varsity D1 football, I would say that the compensation model is more like selling commercial real estate.  You work your tail off and don't get paid for two years, then you make bank.

The typical football player is granted entrance to a university that they could never have qualified for in the first place.  The value of a Stanford degree cannot be understated.  In fact, the value of any collegiate degree cannot be understated if the individual wasn't going to college in the first place.  This is an unbelievable value.  Essentially, it's a guaranteed admission to the reach-iest of reach schools, something that 99.99% of all college applicants desperately desire, and the football player takes it for granted.

Even if it's not a reach school, but it's a college.  How much does an SJSU grad make over a lifetime compared to a high school grad?  Definitely more on average, and depending on the major, could be considerably more.  Significant value.  Football players take it for granted.

They get everything paid; tuition, room, training table, medical, books, etc..  Everything free.  I know how much it cost to put my two through a private school.  More value.  More taking for granted.

They benefit from the contact networks you find in college from ages 18-22.  People who hire you, or buy your product or service, or refer you to people, or give you recommendations, or bring you into their social networks.  brobdingnagian value.  Taken for granted.

The type of football player who gets paid is the type who is getting ready for the NFL or CFL, so their collegiate training applies to their future vocation, whether as player or coach.  On-the-job training, big value.  Taken for granted.

Reach school access, renumerative degree, all expenses paid, significant networks, on-the-job training for the NFL.

But we must also be paid, says the football player who takes all of the above for granted.  Such arrogance.

I'm sick of it.  Time for a developmental league.  Forget about colleges, you high level football players that wouldn't go to college in any other country but this one.  Go be young semipros.

[Mick]

Football is the money sport. The athletes want compensation. The colleges want them to be unpaid amateurs. 

If you're speaking about club sports, I would absolutely 100% agree.  If you're talking about intercollegiate, varsity D1 football, I would say that the compensation model is more like selling commercial real estate.  You work your tail off and don't get paid for two years, then you make bank.

The typical football player is granted entrance to a university that they could never have qualified for in the first place.  The value of a Stanford degree cannot be understated.  In fact, the value of any collegiate degree cannot be understated if the individual wasn't going to college in the first place.  This is an unbelievable value.  Essentially, it's a guaranteed admission to the reach-iest of reach schools, something that 99.99% of all college applicants desperately desire, and the football player takes it for granted.

Even if it's not a reach school, but it's a college.  How much does an SJSU grad make over a lifetime compared to a high school grad?  Definitely more on average, and depending on the major, could be considerably more.  Significant value.  Football players take it for granted.

They get everything paid; tuition, room, training table, medical, books, etc..  Everything free.  I know how much it cost to put my two through a private school.  More value.  More taking for granted.

They benefit from the contact networks you find in college from ages 18-22.  People who hire you, or buy your product or service, or refer you to people, or give you recommendations, or bring you into their social networks.  brobdingnagian value.  Taken for granted.

The type of football player who gets paid is the type who is getting ready for the NFL or CFL, so their collegiate training applies to their future vocation, whether as player or coach.  On-the-job training, big value.  Taken for granted.

Reach school access, renumerative degree, all expenses paid, significant networks, on-the-job training for the NFL.

But we must also be paid, says the football player who takes all of the above for granted.  Such arrogance.

I'm sick of it.  Time for a developmental league.  Forget about colleges, you high level football players that wouldn't go to college in any other country but this one.  Go be young semipros.

[dabigv13]

I agree with a lot of the post. And while I am in favor of organized labor, I don't think college football is really comparable, because CFB players are only labor in some ways, lots related to the points above.

I think paying the players like they want to be paid is not going to end up with a college football system that puts more emphasis on academics or health, it will just enable the best players and the most well funded programs to gain even more from CFB, and turn it into even more of a business.

OTOH, the players have real health concerns that are not properly addressed under the current model, and I do think that some remuneration is appropriate, considering how much the schools and coaches profit. I think a stipend, equal across the entire FBS is the only way to do it. Video games can contract with the FBS players as a whole, and the players get their cut from it. Autographs and marketing and agents should stay regulated like under current model.

[dabigv13]

I agree with a lot of the post. And while I am in favor of organized labor, I don't think college football is really comparable, because CFB players are only labor in some ways, lots related to the points above.

I think paying the players like they want to be paid is not going to end up with a college football system that puts more emphasis on academics or health, it will just enable the best players and the most well funded programs to gain even more from CFB, and turn it into even more of a business.

OTOH, the players have real health concerns that are not properly addressed under the current model, and I do think that some remuneration is appropriate, considering how much the schools and coaches profit. I think a stipend, equal across the entire FBS is the only way to do it. Video games can contract with the FBS players as a whole, and the players get their cut from it. Autographs and marketing and agents should stay regulated like under current model.