SantaClaraHawk":3dmqxgt2 said:
Having grown up in a college town, I think the market could be huge if we're strictly talking football.
Everyone within 20 miles of Stanford, maybe more, knew who McCaffrey was. We all saw his tape on local news. And the default for residents of the Peninsula/South Bay (the space between SF and San Jose) is to like Stanford.
I can think of seven car dealerships in that radius who would have signed local deals or especially those local cable deals where you just get snuck in whenever there was 15 seconds. Big money even locally. Since we're increasingly non local, I agree with you that the pie and fingers in it will hugely expand beyond the average 20-yo's capability of understanding.
I disagree here, and I think this may be why its happening.
I think we will see a small, major market for heisman level talent, and then a significant drop for anyone else. I don't think the marketability will be worth the investment.
Dome's issue with Oregon and Nike is where I see this getting really muddy. Recruits being offered marketing opportunities from major businesses who support the university.
Whether that's the "end" of college sports, who knows. College sports is effectively over, and has been, as an amatuer sports entity for decades now. It's just a matter of whether fans want to continue the exploitation of young athletes for their entertainment while a select few get horribly wealthy from it, or allow those exploited athletes to gain from it.
But as an entity, major college sports is kind of gross. You want it to be healthy and endearing, look at some of the lesser sports. I played D1 soccer and never saw anything like what we read about it. Dated a volleyball player, who was friends with girls from the basketball team, same thing. There just wasn't a commercial interest in our sports, so no (or very minimal, base level recruiting stuff) rule breaking