Bowls want to start paying players…instead of conferences…

[Jake]

It was only a matter of time before these bowl executives fought back against these opt outs that will cost them eyeballs and attendees.

This will get reallllllllllly interesting.

 

[Cusefan69]

Big dollar opportunities for some players. Wow.

 

[SUDadx2]

It was only a matter of time before these bowl executives fought back against these opt outs that will cost them eyeballs and attendees.

This will get reallllllllllly interesting.

Can you provide a link to this information?

 

[JustPherU]

It was only a matter of time before these bowl executives fought back against these opt outs that will cost them eyeballs and attendees.

This will get reallllllllllly interesting.

I wondered why they weren’t already doing that

 

[Jake]

 

[OburgOrange]

Wow

 

[SUDadx2]

College Football’s Bowl System Eyeing Sweeping Overhaul - Sports Illustrated

Serious change could be on the horizon as bowls work to evolve in the current climate of college football.

www.si.com

Thanks. This is an interesting read.

Nick Carparelli is a Syracuse grad. I heard him in an interview last week. He was a Graduate Assistant (GA) with the Syracuse football program, but he never played college football.

Carparelli said the best swag he received from a bowl game was a watch. I think he said he still has that watch from 30 years ago.

I heard our guys all received a Yankee jersey today with their number on it. The jerseys were waiting for them in their lockers when they went to Yankee Stadium earlier today. Pretty cool.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

It seems that if the conferences don’t get the money, they won’t send the teams. Or am I missing something.

 

[JustPherU]

It seems that if the conferences don’t get the money, they won’t send the teams. Or am I missing something.

That would go over just swell with the fan base and donors.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

It seems that if the conferences don’t get the money, they won’t send the teams. Or am I missing something.

Not sure there'd be much the conferences could do to stop schools from participating. Bowls have broadcast contracts, so I have to think this would fall outside the usual "grant-of-rights" agreements. Yeah, there's feeder agreements, but those aren't lock-tight.

Also, the conference is set up to serve the interests of the schools, so the extent to which the Conference can/wants to flex power is questionable.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Lol

Two thoughts

1, this ain't NIL, it's pay to play

2, as with many issues, the answer is often for labor to seize the means of production, so PLAYERS GO GET YO BAG

 

[JustPherU]

Lol

Two thoughts

1, this ain't NIL, it's pay to play

2, as with many issues, the answer is often for labor to seize the means of production, so PLAYERS GO GET YO BAG

NIL ain’t pay to play?

 

[OburgOrange]

NIL ain’t pay to play?

So confusing

 

[JustPherU]

So confusing

Not really, they just need to call it what it is.
Why the big farce?

 

[Trueblue25]

NIL isnt pay to play

How NIL has been executed in the p5 is absolutely pay to play.

This is an extension of that but will make for more entertaining football so im for it

 

[hoopsupstate]

Nice article. One of the problems playing all playoff games on neutral locations is the expense for fans to travel to all the games. If your a playoff team, it could be a problem for fans traveling for three straight weeks. I like the idea of not tying conferences to bowl games. Open all bowls up to everyone. I’m not against making teams qualifying for bowls with a 7-5 record. Providing money to players instead of conferences is another good idea.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

Not really, they just need to call it what it is.
Why the big farce?

The schools and therefore the NCAA don't want it to be the same thing, hence the big farce.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Not sure there'd be much the conferences could do to stop schools from participating. Bowls have broadcast contracts, so I have to think this would fall outside the usual "grant-of-rights" agreements. Yeah, there's feeder agreements, but those aren't lock-tight.

Also, the conference is set up to serve the interests of the schools, so the extent to which the Conference can/wants to flex power is questionable.

Most Bowl games aren’t a financial win for schools. If the money goes to the players, why would the school want to pay money to travel and get nothing in return?

 

[NYCCuse826]

Most Bowl games aren’t a financial win for schools. If the money goes to the players, why would the school want to pay money to travel and get nothing in return?

You're going to see an elimination of bowl games. They're going to consolidate and revert to how it used to be pre late 90s.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

Most Bowl games aren’t a financial win for schools. If the money goes to the players, why would the school want to pay money to travel and get nothing in return?

IIRC, the ACC allows bowl payouts to go directly to the participating teams instead of being pooled.

Also, this isn't a game of absolutes. This sounds like a message from the bowls to the NCAA that something needs to be done because the mood on bowls from consumers has shifted.

 

[orange79]

IIRC, the ACC allows bowl payouts to go directly to the participating teams instead of being pooled.

Also, this isn't a game of absolutes. This sounds like a message from the bowls to the NCAA that something needs to be done because the mood on bowls from consumers has shifted.

I could be wrong, but I believe the ACC pools bowl revenue, and splits it evenly among the teams, keeping a share for itself (i.e., 15 total shares are paid out), except for teams that make the CFP, who get a performance incentive bonus, for lack of a better term.

 

[djcon57]

That would go over just swell with the fan base and donors.

and the players.

"Please come play football at our school...oh, and btw, we wont go to a bowl game for you to get paid if we qualify"

"Ok cool...thanks, I'll go to the school that does"

 

[OttoinGrotto]

NIL ain’t pay to play?

Nobody ever believes me, but no.

 

[rrlbees]

Most Bowl games aren’t a financial win for schools. If the money goes to the players, why would the school want to pay money to travel and get nothing in return?

You’re absolutely right. I know SU has lost money in the past. If the conferences don’t get money then the schools won’t.

 

[MikeSU02]

I would highly recommend reading the whole article for anyone that didn’t.

Paying the players is the least of the items to be interested in, imo. One way or another players will get compensated for bowl games. That’s inevitable regardless of this article.

The rest of the article is much more interesting, imo, for what the bowls are trying to do.