While we were watching baseball...
- Thread starter pseudonym
- Start date
The big loser here is college football coaches. Now that schools will be paying players directly with TV revenues, they'll figure out real quick they're going to be a lot better off with a $5M coach and $10M spent on players than with a $10M coach and $5M for players.
Honestly, I hope they do. It would be no small amount of irony if the group that played a large part in starting the current madness ends up paying a disproportionate share of the penalty.
I hope I’m wrong, but this sure feels like a federal stimulus rollout all over again. A huge sum of money that will somehow finds its way to the wrong place
Car dealers are salivating.
That is what they are paying the former athletes. Does not include what they will pay the current athletes, the elimination of partial scholarship and other gurantees to players on top of a salary.
There's going to be a "salary cap" in the future. It's already being discussed. The key is getting this thing to what it was meant to be. It will eventually get closer.
Especially at the blue bloods. Their greatest asset is that the school recruits itself. It's why a Nick Saban caps out at 9-2 at Michigan State but wins it all at LSU. Obviously there is more to it than that, like experience, intangibles, etc. But having the best players is probably 80% of the game.
That said, you can define "best players" a number of ways. That's where innovation comes in, but by and large, at the blue blood schools, it's about overall talent and having a coach that simply keeps them focused and fundamentally sound.
A good coach/manager also hires the best assistants. I would go 90% on the talent. You can't coach speed, reflex, and size. You can affect them but the game is played on the field.
And jewelers. And liquor stores.
Sadly, financial advisors (who should be the biggest third-party winners) won’t see much more action.
Get unlimited access today.