forums

Is the Superteam dead?

DMoney

DMoney

D-Moni
Administrator
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Messages
22,111
The past couple months, I've dipped my toe into national CFB coverage with Group Chat Sports (please support by liking and subscribing here).

One thing I've learned: every team, no matter how blue blood, has roster concerns. Powerhouses like Ohio State and Alabama are just as worried about DT depth as we are. Even though it was only a half-decade ago, it feels like a long time since Georgia and Alabama stacked their rosters with five stars on the bench. Now, those blue chippers move on the moment they don't play.

Even guys like Damon Wilson (a five-star EDGE slated to be the top rusher for UGA this year) are being poached by the Missouris of the world. In 2020, it was unthinkable that Vanderbilt could upset Alabama. But when it happened this year, it didn't even feel like a fluke.

This got me to thinking: is Ohio State 2024 the last "Super Team" in college football? That team was the result of blue-blood recruiting, unrestricted NIL, and years of booster frustration caused by Michigan. Now, we're entering a potential salary cap era with third-party enforcement.

There's always the risk of selective enforcement, which happened during the Mark Emmert era. Miami got hit for Benihana's dinners while Emmert's friend Nick Saban paid everyone under the table. But the third-party enforcer (Deloitte) is an almost 200-year-old company with half a million employees across the world. They're unlikely to be as corrupt and incompetent as the NCAA.

Is the parity we experienced in 2024 an aberration, or a sign of things to come?
 
Advertisement
bdcane4eva said:
so we still got people thinking...in America...we are going to put a limit on what people can earn huh?
okay...
Click to expand...
Same people have been doing it with professional sports for 50+ years. Ever seen a payscale for government jobs? How about cops? Firefighters? Teachers? Military?
I get what you're trying to say, but that argument has (many) holes in it. Pause. There are no limits to what a player can make in endorsement deals.
 
imo YES we will see more super teams if the salary cap goes into effect. You are right the "hope" would be uniform enforcement but it is still hard to prove 50k was handed in a McDonalds bag. Since both sides are committing crimes they are more likely to stay quiet. Similar to how a drug dealer wont call the cops if he gets robbed of his drugs.

SO now, it is wide open, there is no stacking 5 * because they can get paid right up the road, salary cap comes in and there is a close recruitment where both teams are offering equal pay, I dont doubt for a second the no show jobs, selling the house for above market value, or straight cash are going to be infused again.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati said:
Same people have been doing it with professional sports for 50+ years. Ever seen a payscale for government jobs? How about cops? Firefighters? Teachers? Military?
I get what you're trying to say, but that argument has (many) holes in it. Pause. There are no limits to what a player can make in endorsement deals.
Click to expand...
Are you sure about the latter bolded part? I think part of this settlement is to bring some of that ish back in... Remember that is what NIL is supposed to be. It was intended for the Cam Ward;s of the world to sign with Beats headphones and get paid. NOT for a collective of boosters to dump money into a non-profit and pay a kid to sign some autographs with seemingly zero ROI.

Pretty sure that is what the settlement is trying to do. Cap the kids earnings and make the schools all level and be able to pay the players directly.

Edit: This also made me think why this loophole is not exploited more frequently. Dolphins up against the cap but want to sign Justin Jefferson? Man sorry we cant match what the vikings are offering, but if you sign with Miami we have this luxury car dealer that will pay you millions more than their deal to promote their cars.
 
BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati said:
Same people have been doing it with professional sports for 50+ years. Ever seen a payscale for government jobs? How about cops? Firefighters? Teachers? Military?
I get what you're trying to say, but that argument has (many) holes in it. Pause. There are no limits to what a player can make in endorsement deals.
Click to expand...
my statement was more blanket sarcasm and I'm glad you caught that...point is sooooooo many people think all of these "plans" will "solve" the players being paid issue...when in fact they won't and imo will be literally going back to the way the old guard entrenched money/power brokers want it.
 
Yes, it is D$. The NIL and portal combo killed it. Personally, I don't even see OSU's 24 team as a supper team and that's like $22 mil.
 
Cookie917 said:
Are you sure about the latter bolded part? I think part of this settlement is to bring some of that ish back in... Remember that is what NIL is supposed to be. It was intended for the Cam Ward;s of the world to sign with Beats headphones and get paid. NOT for a collective of boosters to dump money into a non-profit and pay a kid to sign some autographs with seemingly zero ROI.

Pretty sure that is what the settlement is trying to do. Cap the kids earnings and make the schools all level and be able to pay the players directly.

Edit: This also made me think why this loophole is not exploited more frequently. Dolphins up against the cap but want to sign Justin Jefferson? Man sorry we cant match what the vikings are offering, but if you sign with Miami we have this luxury car dealer that will pay you millions more than their deal to promote their cars.
Click to expand...
Short answer to your first question - no, I'm not sure. I was thinking of the pro sports model when I wrote that. CBA is separate of off-field endorsements. I can see the CBA portion getting regulated as you mentioned, but I can't see how the endorsements could be limited. Your Cam Ward Beats example is perfect. Again, I don't KNOW this to be the case (I don't think anyone really does at this stage), but I believe the portion paid via boosters/schools is separate from a 3rd party endorsement deal.

The more I type, the more confused I am getting.
 
bdcane4eva said:
my statement was more blanket sarcasm and I'm glad you caught that...point is sooooooo many people think all of these "plans" will "solve" the players being paid issue...when in fact they won't and imo will be literally going back to the way the old guard entrenched money/power brokers want it.
Click to expand...
I literally have no idea wtf is going to happen and how this will play out. Anyone other than a lawyer who specifically works in this arena has to be in the same boat as me. In my mind, I think they should "copy" the NFL model where there is some sort of salary cap (via CBA) limiting the school/team to the amount they can pay the players directly and the players are free to do ads and such for additional. However, my mind isn't who/what is making these decisions.

As for the old guard, F them. F them all. F Mark Emmert. F the SEC. Double F Nick Saban.
 
BigDikDaddyFromCincinnati said:
Short answer to your first question - no, I'm not sure. I was thinking of the pro sports model when I wrote that. CBA is separate of off-field endorsements. I can see the CBA portion getting regulated as you mentioned, but I can't see how the endorsements could be limited. Your Cam Ward Beats example is perfect. Again, I don't KNOW this to be the case (I don't think anyone really does at this stage), but I believe the portion paid via boosters/schools is separate from a 3rd party endorsement deal.

The more I type, the more confused I am getting.
Click to expand...
Yeah we share the confusion there. That is where I think the free market comes in, so what if Beats wants to pay a Cam Ward? But then how do you differentiate a "true" sponsorship, from Slice and Ice in the grove offering someone 50k solely because they are at Miami? So I think it needs to be all or nothing and my fear is they are leaning toward the nothing model with a salary cap.
 
Advertisement
Cookie917 said:
Yeah we share the confusion there. That is where I think the free market comes in, so what if Beats wants to pay a Cam Ward? But then how do you differentiate a "true" sponsorship, from Slice and Ice in the grove offering someone 50k solely because they are at Miami? So I think it needs to be all or nothing and my fear is they are leaning toward the nothing model with a salary cap.
Click to expand...
Someone mentioned Deloitte overseeing this. Someone mentioned not understanding why this loophole (Booster disguised as a 3rd party company paying a player to promote their product) isn't exploited more. Considering I made my comments initially thinking of what the NFL does, I would assume (oh boy) that the financial oversight of a Deloitte would prevent these sorts of things. Yes, assumption on my part, but is it that far off? I'm leaning that way because if Vizcaya wants to hire Ny Carr to promote their facility and some board says no, there's nothing stopping Vizcaya/Carr from suing the board. Again, that's under current rules and precedent. I'm going to stop here though because I am not an attorney.
 
DMoney said:
The past couple months, I've dipped my toe into national CFB coverage with Group Chat Sports (please support by liking and subscribing here).

One thing I've learned: every team, no matter how blue blood, has roster concerns. Powerhouses like Ohio State and Alabama are just as worried about DT depth as we are. Even though it was only a half-decade ago, it feels like a long time since Georgia and Alabama stacked their rosters with five stars on the bench. Now, those blue chippers move on the moment they don't play.

Even guys like Damon Wilson (a five-star EDGE slated to be the top rusher for UGA this year) are being poached by the Missouris of the world. In 2020, it was unthinkable that Vanderbilt could upset Alabama. But when it happened this year, it didn't even feel like a fluke.

This got me to thinking: is Ohio State 2024 the last "Super Team" in college football? That team was the result of blue-blood recruiting, unrestricted NIL, and years of booster frustration caused by Michigan. Now, we're entering a potential salary cap era with third-party enforcement.

There's always the risk of selective enforcement, which happened during the Mark Emmert era. Miami got hit for Benihana's dinners while Emmert's friend Nick Saban paid everyone under the table. But the third-party enforcer (Deloitte) is an almost 200-year-old company with half a million employees across the world. They're unlikely to be as corrupt and incompetent as the NCAA.

Is the parity we experienced in 2024 an aberration, or a sign of things to come?
Click to expand...
With NIL "parity" would be spread across 5-10 teams-ish, not across 15-20-30.

Now, if they install an NFL-style salary cap then "parity" will spread across 30-ish teams, but not until then...

Tbere will always be Cinderella flukes in any datasets, but consistently in today's NIL, tbe Top 10-ish are simply going to dominate week after week.
 
Back
Top