Just read Sankey's comments on NIL--basically saying that only Congress can fix it (always a scary proposition.)
It's important to note, however, that his comments assume that college athletics are best served by the model that's been in place for decades now--whereby football revenues subsidize every other sport almost completely. It's been wonderful for athletic directors and non-revenue sports, at an extreme expense to football players. That's the reality.
What he doesn't say is that there is a relatively (relative is the key word) simple fix--make football players employees, unionize them, and have a collective bargaining agreement. That model also would mean that much more of the revenues generated by football stay in football--and go to the players. It also would mean you could institute pay scales based on class/experience, etc. A much more even playing field would exist. If you took even a third of football revenues and allocated them to football players, that's about $500k/year for 85 scholarship players. It's a sustainable model (NIL is not under the current structure.)
ADs hate the idea, because they've had a humongous cookie jar to build super nice facilities for every sport under the sun. But no economic model that transfers the amount money from one profitable area to a bunch of unprofitable areas can last. In college football, the numbers are so out of whack.
It's important to note, however, that his comments assume that college athletics are best served by the model that's been in place for decades now--whereby football revenues subsidize every other sport almost completely. It's been wonderful for athletic directors and non-revenue sports, at an extreme expense to football players. That's the reality.
What he doesn't say is that there is a relatively (relative is the key word) simple fix--make football players employees, unionize them, and have a collective bargaining agreement. That model also would mean that much more of the revenues generated by football stay in football--and go to the players. It also would mean you could institute pay scales based on class/experience, etc. A much more even playing field would exist. If you took even a third of football revenues and allocated them to football players, that's about $500k/year for 85 scholarship players. It's a sustainable model (NIL is not under the current structure.)
ADs hate the idea, because they've had a humongous cookie jar to build super nice facilities for every sport under the sun. But no economic model that transfers the amount money from one profitable area to a bunch of unprofitable areas can last. In college football, the numbers are so out of whack.
