One of the potential dominoes of last week's House v. NCAA settlement is the limitation of football roster sizes going forward. In theory, college football rosters would be smaller given the finances now required in a world where revenue sharing with athletes looks like a matter of when and not a matter of if. Roster caps would ensure that all teams — or, at least, all teams in a specific conference — are playing on a level playing field, and the elimination of walk-on spots would be a natural way to shrink rosters.

Very ugly scenario. I suspect that will lead to walk-ons filing a class action lawsuit.

don'''''''''t like it!

I don’t know that the game has ever changed so drastically over time as it has in the past 2-3 years.

Its end end of amateur Athletics as we one knew it, which odd just plain sad

"Revenue sharing" is a big, big statement, because "revenue sharing" depends upon there being a fan base. In the end the fan base is who holds the purse strings. Sure, they get TV contracts. But TV relies upon viewership.

Some people are just whores and totally don't care about it. But even in a warped society, I still don't think it is most people.

(05-29-2024, 09:29 AM)Replying to Calhoun K9

So, can we now boo the players since that was always the argument, they are just kids playing for free?

(05-29-2024, 09:45 AM)Replying to GriffWoody

So, can we now boo the players since that was always the argument, they are just kids playing for free?
[/quote]

IMO; that went out the window with NIL.

---

ESPN wanted an NFL JV and they are getting it. Salary caps, equalization of pay to players, some form of draft to create talent parity and unionization will be the next steps. I see no reason for athletes to be required to be students in the near future. They will be employees of the athletic associations and there is no legal BFOQ for someone to be a student in order be a football player employed by an athletic association.

College football had a good run.