Started By
Message
re: WSJ: College Football Teams Are Now Worth Billions, And Their Value Is Skyrocketing
Posted on 1/18/26 at 2:26 pm to Demosthenian
Posted on 1/18/26 at 2:26 pm to Demosthenian
If their valuation is so strong, why are more athletic departments sinking into the red? Programs that use to turn a net gain, now have net losses.
I understand that football pays for other sports but you can’t separate the two.
Cody Campbell of Texas Tech wants media rights to be negotiated collectively rather than by conference. His reasoning appears to be that they’re leaving money on the table by not selling rights collectively. Really he just wants an even distribution of the cash.
Plus, the expense is being borne by boosters not revenue.
I understand that football pays for other sports but you can’t separate the two.
Cody Campbell of Texas Tech wants media rights to be negotiated collectively rather than by conference. His reasoning appears to be that they’re leaving money on the table by not selling rights collectively. Really he just wants an even distribution of the cash.
Plus, the expense is being borne by boosters not revenue.
0
Posted on 1/18/26 at 2:31 pm to Gunga Din
quote:
So you would rather the NCAA keep all that TV money and give a chunk of Bama's TV money to the Slippery Rocks of the world?
The money was pandora's box. It would have been better for college football to have even revenue sharing and lifting up some of the "Slippery Rocks" of the world but get to keep regional football conferences and avoid the revenue disparities that drove amateurism into the ground.
Remember college basketball players not getting paid wasn't what broke this system. I imagine if the college football arrangement was more like college basketball, we'd still have amateurism because the scale of the money would be diffused across all of FBS.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 2:33 pm to deeprig9
quote:
What did Oklahoma and Georgia do?
LINK
quote:
NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) television plan violated the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts, which were designed to prohibit group actions that restrained open competition and trade.
The NCAA is an organization that regulates college athletics, and membership is voluntary, although NCAA schools are not allowed to play against non-NCAA teams. The case dealt with television rights to college football games, which were controlled by the NCAA and limited the appearance of university teams in each season. The NCAA believed that their control of television rights protected live attendance, which was disputed by a number of colleges.
These larger colleges formed the College Football Association to negotiate television contracts, until the NCAA advised the colleges that they would be banned from all NCAA competitions, not just in football. The Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma and the University of Georgia Athletic Association sued to force the NCAA to stop the practice. The Supreme Court held 7–2 that the NCAA's actions were a restraint of trade and ruled for the universities.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 3:11 pm to Diego Ricardo
Thanks. I was not aware of that. I was but a wee lad back then. I thought you were talking about something relatively recent.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 3:25 pm to Nasty_Canasta
True..
Posted on 1/18/26 at 3:29 pm to Diego Ricardo
The Georgia/Oklahoma suit against the NCAA was absolutely the right ruling. I didn't remember that it was a 7-2 decision. College football is probably more popular than ever.
My biggest complaint about the present state of college football is the unlimited transfer with immediate eligibility. Some guys are playing for their fourth team in their fourth year. How crazy is that? In professional sports you can't jump from one team to another like that.
My biggest complaint about the present state of college football is the unlimited transfer with immediate eligibility. Some guys are playing for their fourth team in their fourth year. How crazy is that? In professional sports you can't jump from one team to another like that.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 3:29 pm to Gunny Hartman
quote:
Well A&M beats LSU a lot
Well they don't. I think A&M has only beat LSU 3 or 4 times since they joined the SEC. Typical A&M fans. Delusional
Posted on 1/18/26 at 3:31 pm to Gunny Hartman
quote:
Well A&M beats LSU a lot.
It’s all relative, but I’d say you’re a bit diluted.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 4:24 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
The fact that we have college football teams being valued in the billions of dollars tells me a couple of things: 1. Our economy is strong
That’s some interesting mental gymnastics.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 5:18 pm to skrayper
Oh here we go Kamala lover. What part of our economy is bad?
It’s not eggs, or gas that CNN harped on for 6 months. Let’s hear it.
It’s not eggs, or gas that CNN harped on for 6 months. Let’s hear it.
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 5:20 pm
Posted on 1/18/26 at 5:31 pm to RTRnFlorida
quote:
Kamala lover.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:09 pm to Demosthenian
Where’s Ole’ Miss?? They said they were the better program and LSU is poor
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:30 pm to bunkerhill
quote:
The Georgia/Oklahoma suit against the NCAA was absolutely the right ruling.
It absolutely was legally the right ruling but philosophically it was bad for the sport. The NCAA controlling the product like the NFL office controls their product would be better in many ways. I don’t care if Alabama Athletics is rich, I just want college football to stay college football. That was over the day this ruling happened. It’s been a thousand cuts over 40 years but it was the first motion that arrived at unlimited free agency and pay for play making a farce of this sport.
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 6:31 pm
Posted on 1/18/26 at 9:49 pm to Bigdawgb
quote:
Yeah, I can understand Texas but I'm surprised at A&M being #2. No offense Aggies.
Location, athletic dept revenue, number of students, number of alumni probably all play into it.
I would personally only have A&M no higher than 3. I would think Texas and Ohio State would be #2, then you would ha gaggle to choose from at #3 between Michigan, Penn State, A&M, ND and maybe USC but the USC brand seems to have lost an entire generation now.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News