Curbelo Fanboy
BERTBALL IS LIFE
How long ago was the first college coach to make more than $5 mil per year. 20 years? As usual the gubmint is 5 days late & several dollars short with solutions to issues.
College Sports (Football)
RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
In a new world of regulated college athletics, under the table payments would probably still exist. But given the amount of money players now command, it’ll be much more difficult to hide a million dollars than it would be $10k presented in a paper sack.
Retro62
- North Bethesda, Maryland
Living in MD, nobody talks about Maryland football. It’s a sad state of affairs from the old Ralph Friedgen days; the program is just dead. Locksley knows the university cares nothing about football right now, so he’s just collecting the paycheck while they continue wallowing in mediocrity. His overall demeanor as a coach would make Lovie look apoplectic.
I only hope they keep him through the next month, I don’t want any upstart infusing that program with energy before we play them.
altgeld88
- Arlington, Virginia
Amen, brother. Let's hope they can't scrape together the ~$10 million buyout until November at the earliest. I want to enjoy a blindingly orange Halloween onslaught in See-Through Stadium.
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
And it's not that ticky-tack car dealer shenanigans won't happen, but with the players making real money that stuff will just be way less impactful.
No one is going to pick a school to get a leased Trans Am like it's 1982 when there are millions of dollars at stake.
They're one of the biggest tragedies of conference realignment. Everything that school was about athletically got ripped away from them for a handful of magic beans.
altgeld88
- Arlington, Virginia
A colleague/close friend played hoops for the Terps in the mid-'60s (he's pushing 80 and refuses to retire!) We talk sports regularly. He has accepted the BT but still mourns the loss of the UVa/UNC/Duke and other ACC rivalries, which were rich ones. I feel badly for him.
It is, but that is 5 post season games on top of 12 regular season. Conference championships are gone. That is a brutal load for players on a one year deal.
agree, but let’s also agree 80% are not really there for academics anymore .
it’s a job
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
In other news
College Football Viewership Down 11% Through September vs. 2025
FBS game broadcasts are averaging 1.7 million viewers.
They've already gotten away with this for years. Overhyping SEC teams for years so the conference looks tougher, talking points of "There's only 2 even 3 losses because they play so and so SEC teams (Who somehow are still in the top 25 despite embarrassing losses and lose some many times until they're forced out of the top 25...but not before another SEC team leapfrogs them), etc.
I'm just glad the B1G has won the last three so it put a lot of that talk to rest. This has happened plenty but this year for example as well. Texas A&M is overrated as hell and finally fell out the top 25 after being as high as top 10 (Thus moving LSU up). Texas seems so as well if Arch isn't playing well. Oklahoma is weak. Ole Miss is still #9 after being blown out by Florida (Who is improved but still).
I would do away with preseason rankings all together and only keep the preseason player lists, if anything. Or you can end both until around Week 4-6 when you have a good idea of who is who.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
Match ups / lack of big games are a big part that. College Gameday is setting record viewership numbers showing the eyeballs are still there.In other news
College Football Viewership Down 11% Through September vs. 2025
FBS game broadcasts are averaging 1.7 million viewers.sports.yahoo.com
And if anything, going to a 24 team playoff and using strength of schedule as a qualification / seeding metric will further incentivize teams to play a stronger non-conference schedule leading to an increase in early season ratings. What it‘ll do to bowls is a sadder conversation.
Overall, I really enjoy your posts, but you’ve been warning about the end times of college football for years now and for the most part, interest in the sport has only continued to rise.
But, I’m sure if you continue to preach your message, you’ll eventually be right.
Last edited:
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
I don't even really feel the need to argue this anymore. Everyone willing to use their eyes can see this industry in decline and running headlong into making it worse.
I think there's an underlying fallacy in your argument, at least from the posts I've seen.
All legacy media is in decline, and the marketplace for entertainment is far, far more diversified. The question isn't whether decisions are resulting in lower ratings since that's a foregone conclusion. The question is whether the decisions are making it worse than the decline we'd see anyway. A weekly drop in ratings doesn't say much about it for a whole host of reasons.
I don't know how the decisions are impacting the sport, and I won't argue that you're wrong. The overall landscape is a big part of the equation though, and things like schedules and weekly matchups matter. Some other things I see frequently argued about are cost of attendance and the television availability of games. Both are significant friction. Youth sport often comes up too since there's a lot going on there affecting the long term.
It's clear that the decision makers believe that the trade-off between meaningful regular season games and playoff interest is a win financially, at least on their time horizon.
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
Most of the reporting in the sports media has been positive about the protect college sports act. Thought I'd link this since it has some counter-argument