Bobcat Nation Forums
http://bobcatnation.com/bobcatbb/
Big thing that could happen is California school seniors may enter the portal to play this fall in FCS.Colter_Nuanez wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2020 4:48 pmhttps://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/t ... 0474515483
This would give a huge advantage to the Alabama's, Ohio State's, Texas, etc the big bucks, wealthier boosters and really hurt the New Mexico States type unis around the country??? CorrectMontanabob wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:09 amLet the money war begin.
POWER 5 will definitely need more money
https://americanactionnews.com/politics ... ncaa-case/
This is another poorly written article, just like almost every other piece of content on the ruling.RickRund wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:54 amThis would give a huge advantage to the Alabama's, Ohio State's, Texas, etc the big bucks, wealthier boosters and really hurt the New Mexico States type unis around the country??? CorrectMontanabob wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:09 amLet the money war begin.
POWER 5 will definitely need more money
https://americanactionnews.com/politics ... ncaa-case/
Will hurt the majority of FCS and lower divisions??? Just wondering. That will be LOTS of bucks changing hands.
the dispute before the court centered around the NCAA’s rules restricting certain academic-related benefits for student-athletes, such as post-graduate scholarships, internships, computers and science equipment
It will only give an advantage to schools/departments that allocate more money to benefits than their peers. NMSU isn't a peer of Alabama so they won't be hurt by this. No player is deciding between those two schools. Now, if UNM and NMSU fund their football/athletic departments significantly differently it could make a difference (ie. one provides internships or equipment and one doesn't). This seems to be an extension of "full cost of attendance".A separate battle is playing out in state legislatures and on Capitol Hill over whether athletes can be compensated for use of their name, image and likeness.
There’s already a lot of bucks changing hands.RickRund wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:54 amThis would give a huge advantage to the Alabama's, Ohio State's, Texas, etc the big bucks, wealthier boosters and really hurt the New Mexico States type unis around the country??? CorrectMontanabob wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:09 amLet the money war begin.
POWER 5 will definitely need more money
https://americanactionnews.com/politics ... ncaa-case/
Will hurt the majority of FCS and lower divisions??? Just wondering. That will be LOTS of bucks changing hands.
It goes hand in hand with NIL. How can you not say the schools won't pay more? Yeah, they don't want to but will they? You Betcha. They do it now, just don't get caught.coloradocat wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 12:22 pmThis is another poorly written article, just like almost every other piece of content on the ruling.RickRund wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:54 amThis would give a huge advantage to the Alabama's, Ohio State's, Texas, etc the big bucks, wealthier boosters and really hurt the New Mexico States type unis around the country??? CorrectMontanabob wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:09 amLet the money war begin.
POWER 5 will definitely need more money
https://americanactionnews.com/politics ... ncaa-case/
Will hurt the majority of FCS and lower divisions??? Just wondering. That will be LOTS of bucks changing hands.
the dispute before the court centered around the NCAA’s rules restricting certain academic-related benefits for student-athletes, such as post-graduate scholarships, internships, computers and science equipmentIt will only give an advantage to schools/departments that allocate more money to benefits than their peers. NMSU isn't a peer of Alabama so they won't be hurt by this. No player is deciding between those two schools. Now, if UNM and NMSU fund their football/athletic departments significantly differently it could make a difference (ie. one provides internships or equipment and one doesn't). This seems to be an extension of "full cost of attendance".A separate battle is playing out in state legislatures and on Capitol Hill over whether athletes can be compensated for use of their name, image and likeness.
The boosters have nothing to do with the ruling. When we get to the NIL issue then they are involved but this ruling was just about what schools can/cannot provide directly to players.
Even NIL or other forms of payment aren't going to change the landscape of college football. There are already multiple levels of college football (top tier P5, bottom tier P5, G5, top tier FCS, bottom tier FCS, D2, etc.). They play games against each other and in some cases technically compete for the same ultimate championship and these things won't change that.