Deion says salary cap needed ... and I agree

BamaNation

Publisher and Benevolent Dictator
Staff member
Apr 9, 1999
24,734
24,536
1,532
Silicon Slopes
tidefans.com
espn.com said:
"So the problem is, you got a guy that's not that darn good, but he could go to another school and they give him a half million dollars. You can't compete with that. And it don't make sense."
...
"Now you've got parents trying to be agents, you've got the homeboys trying to be agents, you've got the friends trying to be agents. You got a lot of bull junk going on. And quite frankly, we're sick of it. I'll say it for everybody: We're sick of it."



Deion is right...now... Of course, if he enters the transfer portal to a real P4 school, he'll change his tune again.
 


Deion is right...now... Of course, if he enters the transfer portal to a real P4 school, he'll change his tune again.
Deion wasn’t right, Nick Saban was right. He was ridiculed for his stance at the beginning, now it’s too late.
 
He's right, but isn't there a cap with the revenue sharing? With regards to NIL contracts, I don't see how a cap will ever be put in place. Instead, there should be a rule that NIL contracts can't be tied to playing for a specific school. Force NIL contracts to be about what they should be, which is players getting the opportunity to capitalize off their performance/popularity, not pay for play. Let players get a cut of their jersey sales.
 
Let's just go full NFL style and stop recruiting and have a draft. Each dafted player signs a three year contract and teams have the right to trade at the end of each semester.
 
  • Facepalm
Reactions: bravo6
Deion's right. But he's saying this only because Colorado doesn't have a sugar daddy like Phil Knight (Oregon) or Jimmy Haslam (Tennessee) or similar.

If, say, Bill Gates had gone to the University of Colorado and was a big football booster, Coach Prime would be saying exactly the opposite.

Side note: Phil Knight's largesse is the only reason Oregon has become nationally relevant. He's 87. I wonder if he's made provisions for Oregon at his death.

Reason I ask is that Boone Pickens bankrolled Okie Light for a number of years and bought their way into a period of prominence. Then he died, and one of several things happened: He didn't make a provision for OSU. Or if he did, the provision wasn't big enough. Or Pickens' heirs aren't as enthusiastic about the Cowboys as he was. In any event, the Pokes don't have the money they once did, and it shows on the field.
 
Last edited:
Deion's right. But he's saying this only because Colorado doesn't have a sugar daddy like Phil Knight or Jimmy Haslam or similar.

If, say, Bill Gates had gone to the University of Colorado and was a big football booster, Coach Prime would be saying exactly the opposite.
odd that he said nothing while his sons were in college
 
Let's just go full NFL style and stop recruiting and have a draft. Each dafted player signs a three year contract and teams have the right to trade at the end of each semester.
I fully expect this to happen in the coming years. Schools are not going to standby while the Texas's and Oregons, etc buy up all the players.
 
The only reasonable control that might work would be to make two changes. One, put a monetary cap on players by position. Obviously a QB would have a higher cap than a safety. Secondly I believe the player should have to sign a contract. At least 2 years in length. After that they can do year to year. The players get money, but teams have something they can manage rosters with. and the caps would prevent Texas and Ohio State splitting all the good players.
 
While I think his motives and timing are more than a little suspect, Sanders is right. We do need a salary cap and a way to confirm the legitimacy of outside pay-for-play money that doesn't come from the school.

Trouble is, I'll be shocked if any of that stands up to a court challenge -- which will be filed about 5 seconds after a 7-figure contract for turning on the donor's irrigation system every morning is thrown out. Then there's the question of uniform enforceability across all 50 states, complete with 50 different legislatures and 50 different sets of applicable laws.

Nobody has ever explained how, from a legal perspective, this new CSC thing is any different from the old NCAA. As in, why is the NCAA 0-for-forever in court cases, but the CSC won't be?

Which is why we need either (1) Congressional legislation or (2) a union / management / collective bargaining agreement setup.

I don't like either solution. I wish we could go back to the pre-O'Bannon days (except with a competent, consistent and fair NCAA). But they're the only ones I see that are uniformly enforceable across all 50 states and will stand up in court.

I'm all ears for better suggestions. But simply saying, "Here's what we do...." without uniform national legal enforceability is a pipe dream.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads