Well, they are not market-based professional teams, in the sense that their finances are subsidized.At the BCS level, and certainly the top echelon of the BCS, it is fully professionalized. These programs are for all intent and purposes professional sport franchises of their respective universities. The problem, as I see it, is that without guardrails (salary caps being one) the system gets under severe strain and the competitive landscape can quickly get severely tilted to an even greater extent than it already is.
This system has absolutely nothing to do with academics anymore, absolutely nothing. The Ivies made exactly the right decision years ago in avoiding this.
No. UConn simply doesn't fit the B1G mold. The ACC and B12 are more realistic aspirations.If the B1G decided to go to an uneven revenue distribution model like the ACC, would the B1G have any more interest in UConn?
Football wise, UConn would likely receive a very low payout, with a higher payout for basketball. If UConn's total payout was only say $25-$30 million, then UConn would not be taking money away from the other B1G schools by having an equal payout. Does that make UConn more valuable to the B1G?
Well, they are not market-based professional teams, in the sense that their finances are subsidized.
So, I would say they are still mostly state-subsidized entities. Let them go fully pro and share the money 50/50 like the NFL does.