• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Eat What You Kill


Hville said:
discuss

www.espn.com

Neb. AD foresees 'eat what you kill' revenue model

New Nebraska athletic director Troy Dannen told ESPN he expects revenue distribution in college sports to become more performance-based over time, resulting in an "eat what you kill" model.
www.espn.com www.espn.com
Click to expand...
I thought this was going to be a misplaced thread on hunting wildlife :cool:. Seems as if the AD makes some not too wild leaps regarding the future of college ball going to a more pro model of revenue distribution. The pace of change quickens....GBR
 
Compensation/Pay Raises based on merit/performance (aka value to the organization) is something that we're all used to in the Coporate World.

Such a model in college athletics will further recognize/reward (and separate) those programs with the greatest resources, talent and results.

It makes a lot of cents. ;)
 
Last edited:
EdgeCrusher said:
I thought this was going to be a misplaced thread on hunting wildlife :cool:. Seems as if the AD makes some not too wild leaps regarding the future of college ball going to a more pro model of revenue distribution. The pace of change quickens....GBR
Click to expand...
I remember saying this exact thing and was told Title IX won't allow it...Now that the AD says it, I guess Title IX doesn't apply.
Shocking I tell you, shocking.
 



I think the pro model is more relevant. When you need leagues to function, you need many participants in the league - you cannot favor one or two endlessly as they use the favors to increase their distance, or soon you will not have a league. The MLBs and NFLs know that. Hence draft order, caps on spending, etc.
 
Last edited:
EastOfEden said:
I think the pro model is more relevant. When you need leagues to function, you need many participants in the league - you cannot favor one or two endlessly as they use the favors to increase their distance, or soon you will not have a league. The MLBs and NFLs know that. Hence draft order, caps on spending, etc.
Click to expand...
The one model being proposed is a 60-70 league setup with ten other schools allowed in through previous record/showing.
This goes beyond the NFL model
 
EastOfEden said:
I think the pro model is more relevant. When you need leagues to function, you need many participants in the league - you cannot favor one or two endlessly as they use the favors to increase their distance, or soon you will not have a league. The MLBs and NFLs know that. Hence draft order, caps on spending, etc.
Click to expand...
I think you'll see 36-40 teams max in the P2. Schools will split revenue mostly equally (bonuses for winning). Athletes will be a mess with some combo of union/non-unions members. You're top players will get paid well, the majority will make a very small amount. Most "side" varsity sports will be reduced to club sports, no one is going to pay them as employees.

Maybe a CBA gets worked out but 36+ schools spanning 20+ states, with some players initially being minors, differing state laws on unions/dues, I think a CBA will be very tough.
 




NU_Alum said:
I remember saying this exact thing and was told Title IX won't allow it...Now that the AD says it, I guess Title IX doesn't apply.
Shocking I tell you, shocking.
Click to expand...
Shocking I tell you, shocking. You spent various threads arguing Title IX doesn't apply because they would be employees. (you were wrong) The revenue model you even suggested would be negotiated by Unions and would allow various pay scales for different positions.

You are obviously trying to make a connection to something entirely different for the purpose of circling around to rehash the same argument you had already gotten beat up on. But to help you out. This article and plan isn't about merit based performance pay for the players. Thus title IX has nothing to do with it. AD Dannen is discussing the Eat what you kill model for PROGRAMS, Athletic Departments and Conferences and their survival. Not whether football players should be employees.
 
Last edited:
Hville said:
Shocking I tell you, shocking. You spent various threads arguing Title IX doesn't apply because they would be employees. (you were wrong) The revenue model you even suggested would be negotiated by Unions and would allow various pay scales for different positions.

You are obviously trying to make a connection to something entirely different for the purpose of circling around to rehash the same argument you had already gotten beat up on. But to help you out. This article and plan isn't about merit based performance pay for the players. Thus title IX has nothing to do with it. AD Dannen is discussing the Eat what you kill model for PROGRAMS, Athletic Departments and Conferences and their survival. Not whether football players should be employees.
Click to expand...
Sigh, you just can't stick to topics, you always have to bring up your past trolling and losses.

Title IX isn't going to apply to employees in regard to their compensation, nothing has changed on that front. Title IX applies, strictly speaking, to employees, but not in their compensation models like we're discussing.

I've been very clear that I think a union model is the most likely in some states, but it isn't going to work across the board. Each state is different and some states do not allow forced union membership (right to work states). In states without forced membership, getting the stud QB for example to agree to join for pre-set salary just isn't going to happen. Why would a Dylan agree to play at Nebraska and make the same as the new bowling commit (again, this is an example numbers aren't my guessing on pay)?

Second, no school is going to employ the women's bowling team and pay some insane salaries/benefits. It just doesn't make economic sense and it's not discriminatory to pay football players more than bowlers.

The revenue model he's discussing broadly is for programs, but that money is going to the "employees" of each program. Thus, it's going to apply to the athletes. Sorry, I didn't realize it had to be dumbed down that far.
 
NU_Alum said:
Sigh, you just can't stick to topics, you always have to bring up your past trolling and losses.

Title IX isn't going to apply to employees in regard to their compensation, nothing has changed on that front. Title IX applies, strictly speaking, to employees, but not in their compensation models like we're discussing.

I've been very clear that I think a union model is the most likely in some states, but it isn't going to work across the board. Each state is different and some states do not allow forced union membership (right to work states). In states without forced membership, getting the stud QB for example to agree to join for pre-set salary just isn't going to happen. Why would a Dylan agree to play at Nebraska and make the same as the new bowling commit (again, this is an example numbers aren't my guessing on pay)?

Second, no school is going to employ the women's bowling team and pay some insane salaries/benefits. It just doesn't make economic sense and it's not discriminatory to pay football players more than bowlers.

The revenue model he's discussing broadly is for programs, but that money is going to the "employees" of each program. Thus, it's going to apply to the athletes. Sorry, I didn't realize it had to be dumbed down that far.
Click to expand...
Get real. You were the first one bring up past posts when you tried to say you had already suggested this but were shot down over Title IX. I'll repeat since you are struggling with comprehension. What Dannen is talking about is revenue Distribution to the schools and what value each school is bringing to conferences. Thus the examples of how the schools are presently compensated equally.

1713214653598.png



This article is nothing about the revenue distribution to players and Title IX. You are making an irrelevant point from a different argument trying to use this one as your grounds for an argument you already lost.
 



Hville said:
Get real. You were the first one bring up past posts when you tried to say you had already suggested this but were shot down over Title IX. I'll repeat since you are struggling with comprehension. What Dannen is talking about is revenue Distribution to the schools and what value each school is bringing to conferences. Thus the examples of how the schools are presently compensated equally.

View attachment 106314


This article is nothing about the revenue distribution to players and Title IX. You are making an irrelevant point from a different argument trying to use this one as your grounds for an argument you already lost.
Click to expand...
If/when the athletes are deemed employees can you tell me who pays them? Do you think that "whomever" pay these employees wins more games and thus makes more money that this new money will somehow find its way to the employees?

1713215381302.png
 
NU_Alum said:
If/when the athletes are deemed employees can you tell me who pays them? Do you think that "whomever" pay these employees wins more games and thus makes more money that this new money will somehow find its way to the employees?

View attachment 106316
Click to expand...
Can you just stop trying to turn this thread on conference money distribution into an employee/Title 1X thread? You already got that one closed down once. Better yet do me a favor. Block me so that every time I start a thread, you don't come running to change the topic.
 

Hville said:
Can you just stop trying to turn this thread on conference money distribution into an employee/Title 1X thread? You already got that one closed down once. Better yet do me a favor. Block me so that every time I start a thread, you don't come running to change the topic.
Click to expand...
1713215989299.png


Just stick with the topic, it's money distribution which obviously goes to players.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top