5 Year Member
We'll just have to disagree on the coaches versus athletes as a strawman. Arguing that players are mistreated because coaches are paid high salaries is to dismiss the value that the coach creates for the athlete. It is not conflating value and experience. I'm also not arguing athletes shouldn't profit off NIL. I'm mostly pointing out there is a huge opportunity for exploitation and a college athlete might end up with a big payday before ever playing a down because it assuages the ego of a big money booster rather than anything to do with the actual NIL value of the athlete. That's what separates it from the NIL opportunities in professional sports.The argument about coaches is not a strawman. You are conflating experience with value. In the entertainment business, it doesn't matter if you have 30 years of experience or 1 year. The relevant question is do you draw eyeballs? And star players, especially QBs, draw eyeballs.
I see it said over and over again that a star QB is nothing without the Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St. or Nebraska. People follow the school not the player. No, people follow programs that win and winning takes elite players.
For the most part, the NCAA operates much like a cartel. The cost of labor has been fixed at the cost of attendance, when it's clear the market clearing price is much higher. The 'Bama QB getting 7 figures in endorsement deals tells you everything you need to know about the market for elite QBs.
This was all inevitable the minute college football starting signing TV contracts, which shifted the sport from amateur athletic contest to show business.