How many of you are planning to reduce your exposure to college football because of this? I mean beyond UM. This question is more to take temperature than make a point, and a similar debate on the Boise State 24/7 board has been robust, to say the least.
Factor that BSU fans think they lose more than they gain from the portal into your calculation. No doubt there’s a top-down effect to this.
I resist the characterization that the NCAA “let” this happen. There have been lawsuits practically everywhere, and to me, the NCAA sobbing in a fetal position in a corner of an Indianapolis warehouse with a slight rock back and forth was inevitable. Of course they were feckless, because the only room they read were the bastions of amateurism and supporters like some of you here… and not the rest of America.
One thing I should note: we’re talking about a valuation list within the portal, windows for the transfer portal, discussions about moving up and down, etc. Sounds like international soccer- in reality, that means the way most team sports are treated everywhere but in North America. There was always a basis for comparison between these, but it sounds more harmonious now. So when you suggest more business/marketing involvement, sure, Nike folk can teach a few tricks, but in these days of the American non-compete clause and sports cartels and other local oligarchies, methinks your business contacts should know something about actually competing.
Oh, something worth an edit. Scholarships have been year-to-year for a long time. Want people to stick around longer? Make sure a multi-year contract is involved… 2 or 3 will work, you don’t usually get longer than that in Europe. To say you want players to have more loyalty means the school needs to also express that, and that hasn’t always been the case.
