OT: NIL and the Transfer Portal...How do you fix it?

[mussels]

Can probably figure out some sort of classification where the athletes are only employees if they generate money for their effort. So if the school doesn't sell tickets to the non-revenue sports or whatever, it'll be fine.

Hopefully, but keep in mind that the now-on-hold effort to be represented by a union was initiated by Dartmouth basketball. Not exactly a revenue powerhouse.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Funny but most of us prefer sure things. Blowouts haven't stopped the UConn women from having a national audience. People who didn't play golf started following Tiger Woods. Remember when The Cowboys were Americas team? For decades the Yankees were the team for most of the nation including areas which had their own team.

Bandwagon fans tune in to sporting event to be entertained. And these fans don't get entertained losing or stressing out game after game. Even in this forum which is populated predominately with obsessed dedicated fans your postulation has holes. Take a poll. Which game would people in this forum prefer watching again - the competitive Butler championship game or this past season's NCAA tournament game against Illinois? Which viewing experience gives them more satisfaction? Not the result. But the viewing experience. Take another poll. Who in this forum would like to stomp Duke, Providence or Syracuse every game versus eke out a win game after game.

Sports fans without an allegiance to any one team don't align with your point of view. And the majority of fans are bandwagon fans. If the UConn mens bb team keeps winning championships more and more unaffiliated fans will become UConn fans. And they would prefer that we dominate every game.

So getting back to NIL. I maintain that the transferring out of players in football, even taking place among the current stronger programs, will have a huge negative impact to teams including these stronger programs. They will have to spend a lot of money to keep their best players from being poached and although they have more funding paying those top players will eat up those funds quickly. They will struggle to go two deep with superior players. A few injuries which currently doesn't impact them will in the future. So I disagree with you and am predicting football parity. The second point I disagree with is that this outcome will translate to more close games, not less. And the third thing I disagree with you is that the nationwide viewership for college football will decrease as a result. As a UConn fan I would love to see the college football power base take a big hit.

You are arguing that people want blowouts. If that is the case, why aren’t fans demanding schools downgrade leagues so they can win more games? And why not play all of UConn’s non conference games against NEC schools?

Which games draw better crowds, ones that will be competitive or one that will be a blowout? Does your preference for blowouts extend to when UConn is on the losing side?

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Funny but most of us prefer sure things. Blowouts haven't stopped the UConn women from having a national audience. People who didn't play golf started following Tiger Woods. Remember when The Cowboys were Americas team? For decades the Yankees were the team for most of the nation including areas which had their own team.

I feel like Women’s college bball having its moment now, when the UConn women haven’t dominated in a while and there is more parity than the game has seen in a long time is not the argument for your point that you think it is.

 

[ctchamps]

I feel like Women’s college bball having its moment now, when the UConn women haven’t dominated in a while and there is more parity than the game has seen in a long time is not the argument for your point that you think it is.

There isn't parity. Just 4-8 new dominating teams. It was UConn Tennessee with two to four other potentials. Not it's UConn South Carolina with two to four other potentials. And UConn has been to the final four all but one year in the last decade plus. And UConn has had the worst luck injury wise the past three years including last year where they were one contentious basket from playing in the finals.

 

[ctchamps]

You are arguing that people want blowouts. If that is the case, why aren’t fans demanding schools downgrade leagues so they can win more games? And why not play all of UConn’s non conference games against NEC schools?

Which games draw better crowds, ones that will be competitive or one that will be a blowout? Does your preference for blowouts extend to when UConn is on the losing side?

I'm talking about non dedicated fans. You want national audiences to turn into games. Not just the dedicated school fans who have season tickets. How many UConn fans is that? 10 - 20 - thousand who are going to the games and are the passionate dedicated fans that are not the average fans. That want to see strong competition but come to this forum when the game should have been a blow out and we win by 4 - 8 points.

In our 99 championship year almost all the hype was about Duke and they were blowing out teams game after game.

People root for winners. They don't care how that happens. If there is not a succession of years by a dominant team casual fans start to tune out. But give them something that's a sure or almost sure thing and they tune in. It's not like Caitlin Clark had a national audience the first two seasons of her career.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

There isn't parity. Just 4-8 new dominating teams. It was UConn Tennessee with two to four other potentials. Not it's UConn South Carolina with two to four other potentials. And UConn has been to the final four all but one year in the last decade plus. And UConn has had the worst luck injury wise the past three years including last year where they were one contentious basket from playing in the finals.

There’s less parity than men’s bball, there’s way more parity than there used to be in women’s bball though and the average fan seems to like that.

 

[ctchamps]

There’s less parity than men’s bball, there’s way more parity than there used to be in women’s bball though and the average fan seems to like that.

There is significantly less parity versus the men. After the top 4 - 8 teams there is a large drop-off in talent. There are far fewer upsets for those top teams than in mens basketball. Have things gotten better. Yes. Maybe you have another 20 good teams that give some challenge instead of five. But that still leaves 330 teams that are just w's for these few teams. The bar was so low and the change so little as to not make the improvement significant imo. Ratings are up because of the marketing of certain players like Caitlin and Paige and the media is finally recognizing they can make a decent profit promoting the women's game.