CFB breaks the bank with its first 40,000.000 dollar roster

Eurocat · Feb 25, 2026

If Lane Kiffin does not succeed at LSU, it will not be for a lack of spending. On3's Pete Nakos reported that LSU has already topped $40 million in NIL money to build their roster for 2026. The Tigers were mentioned as the top spenders in college football this offseason as Nakos spoke with 14 general managers.

"Of the 14 Power Four general managers and staffers that On3 spoke with, 10 mentioned LSU as the top spender in the transfer portal," Nakos wrote on Tuesday. "In their first transfer portal with new head coach Lane Kiffin, the Tigers ranked No. 2 in the On3 Team Transfer Portal Rankings.

"Multiple general managers believe that LSU has the highest payroll in the sport entering the 2026 season, exceeding $40 million. The Tigers landed quarterback Sam Leavitt, offensive tackle Jordan Seaton and EDGE Princewill Umanmielen, ultimately bringing in 40 new players via the transfer portal."

College football powerhouse's spending spree breaks bank with $40 million roster

One college football power is sparing no expense when it comes to NIL money in an attempt to win a championship. Find out why Lane Kiffin has opposing program's

www.si.com

Hungry Jack · Feb 25, 2026

About $400k per player, on average

CatManTrue · Feb 26, 2026

Still pretty cheap compared to the NFL!

AdamOnFirst · Feb 26, 2026

Being the highest spender in the portal isn't being the highest spender. They had to turn over their roster and had no stars to pay to retain.

That said, Texas was reported to be #1 last year at a little under $40M, so the numbers are about right

CatManTrue · Feb 26, 2026

AdamOnFirst said:
Being the highest spender in the portal isn't being the highest spender. They had to turn over their roster and had no stars to pay to retain.

That said, Texas was reported to be #1 last year at a little under $40M, so the numbers are about right

I thought Oregon also had a ~$40M roster last year too?

AdamOnFirst · Feb 26, 2026

CatManTrue said:
I thought Oregon also had a ~$40M roster last year too?

TBH I just did a quick google, I didn't know the number off the top of my head. Plenty were IN that ballpark. My broader point was it's apples and oranges with a team like Oregon, OSU, Texas, etc that has a lot of elite talent to retain vs a team like LSU with none who is doing all their spending in the portal. And if it's LSU at $40M in the portal, I'm not sure they'll even be #1.

Sheffielder · Feb 26, 2026

So...at what point does everyone associated with the sport - from fans, coaches, writers, etc. - acknowledge a degree of embarrassment for overspending on a football program? Does that ever happen? Do we not agree a program looks foolish by literally just outspending everyone?

Purple Pile Driver · Feb 26, 2026

Sheffielder said:
So...at what point does everyone associated with the sport - from fans, coaches, writers, etc. - acknowledge a degree of embarrassment for overspending on a football program? Does that ever happen? Do we not agree a program looks foolish by literally just outspending everyone?

Don’t care. It’s not my money. I don’t tell people how to spend their own money.

CatManTrue · Feb 26, 2026

Sheffielder said:
So...at what point does everyone associated with the sport - from fans, coaches, writers, etc. - acknowledge a degree of embarrassment for overspending on a football program? Does that ever happen? Do we not agree a program looks foolish by literally just outspending everyone?

We as a country happily spend billions on this game, and other even sillier games.

Meanwhile countless children go malnourished, poorly cares for, and miseducated in America.

Sports spending has been foolish for decades. I doubt it slows down anytime soon.

Purple Pile Driver · Feb 26, 2026

CatManTrue said:
We as a country happily spend billions on this game, and other even sillier games.

Meanwhile countless children go malnourished, poorly cares for, and miseducated in America.

Sports spending has been foolish for decades. I doubt it slows down anytime soon.

Soapbox Jeff. Like redirecting those donations would cure all ills in America. They earned it, if they want to spend it on athletes, the gambling tables or world hunger. Their money!

CatManTrue · Feb 26, 2026

Purple Pile Driver said:
Soapbox Jeff. Like redirecting those donations would cure all ills in America. They earned it, if they want to spend it on athletes, the gambling tables or world hunger. Their money!

My point was that we’re spending money on the wrong things as a society and culture.

At least the Illinois government is wisely saving billions by letting Indiana pay the Bears

Catreporter · Feb 26, 2026

I'm sure all those players are signing with LSU just to get a great education. LOL.

AdamOnFirst · Feb 26, 2026

Sheffielder said:
So...at what point does everyone associated with the sport - from fans, coaches, writers, etc. - acknowledge a degree of embarrassment for overspending on a football program? Does that ever happen? Do we not agree a program looks foolish by literally just outspending everyone?

Why?

CatManTrue · Feb 26, 2026

Catreporter said:
I'm sure all those players are signing with LSU just to get a great education. LOL.

Lane Kiffin will give them an excellent education in banging hot undergrad coeds, exciting regular season offenses and how to lose in the postseason, if they get there.

I hope the LSU Governor is still in office when they likely fire him in a couple of years and the taxpayers owe him $50M just like they do Chip Kelly.

prez77 · Feb 26, 2026

CatManTrue said:
My point was that we’re spending money on the wrong things as a society and culture.

At least the Illinois government is wisely saving billions by letting Indiana pay the Bears

It's an interesting economics social welfare problem. The players are receiving their market value by creating an auction for their services. But in so doing, they are driving their total costs far higher than they need be to deliver entertainment value to the consumer. I seriously doubt that college football is any more enjoyed in this economic regime than it was when it was operated a lot more cheaply. Where all that money would go absent the player auction is an open question. Maybe it would end up in Vegas or sports cars anyway. I would also say the college football players are no less deserving of the millions than the Ohtanis and Mahomes are for theirs.

phatcat_rivals223240 · Feb 26, 2026

Purple Pile Driver said:
Don’t care. It’s not my money. I don’t tell people how to spend their own money.

It will surely have an effect on ticket prices, streaming services (and the ungodly amount of commercials)*

*I'm in favor of players getting paid. I'm also strongly in favor of them going to class

Purple Pile Driver · Feb 27, 2026

phatcat_rivals223240 said:
It will surely have an effect on ticket prices, streaming services (and the ungodly amount of commercials)*

*I'm in favor of players getting paid. I'm also strongly in favor of them going to class

It’s a free market. If prices exceed what one perceives to be the value then demand declines. Happens to just about all products.

phatcat_rivals223240 · Feb 27, 2026

Purple Pile Driver said:
It’s a free market. If prices exceed what one perceives to be the value then demand declines. Happens to just about all products.

Right, I am simply point out that it IS your money if you consume the product/service. Of course, you can decide not to consume, but if you do consume, it is your money.

And if you choose, say, to consume an inferior good due to rising prices (say, NIU football) then it still affects you. It only has no effect if you are indifferent to the product.
Rising prices affect the consumer. It IS your money.

Hungry Jack · Feb 27, 2026

prez77 said:
It's an interesting economics social welfare problem. The players are receiving their market value by creating an auction for their services. But in so doing, they are driving their total costs far higher than they need be to deliver entertainment value to the consumer. I seriously doubt that college football is any more enjoyed in this economic regime than it was when it was operated a lot more cheaply. Where all that money would go absent the player auction is an open question. Maybe it would end up in Vegas or sports cars anyway. I would also say the college football players are no less deserving of the millions than the Ohtanis and Mahomes are for theirs.

“Higher than they need to be”

You argument falls apart with that purely subjective statement.

You then point out that college football was previously operated more cheaply. This is because the players were providing subsidized labor for their performance. You basically make this point when you argue that players are “no less deserving of the millions” than professional players

prez77 · Feb 27, 2026

Hungry Jack said:
“Higher than they need to be”

You argument falls apart with that purely subjective statement.

You then point out that college football was previously operated more cheaply. This is because the players were providing subsidized labor for their performance. You basically make this point when you argue that players are “no less deserving of the millions” than professional players

I short-handed the phrase "need to be" Should have written "need to be to satisfy the marketplace" which is objective setting aside the various behavioral critiques of manipulation of markets and demand. I would also say that the market value of the players is subject to the resources available to pay in the market. If the consumer is satisfied with a less expensive product, which they clearly were at one time, then the market value of the product is lower. There is no cardinal amount that the workers, I mean players, should be paid unless you entertain a labor theory of value, which the American economy doesn't. So I'll stick with my basic premise, the auction bid everything up and may, may, result in less than optimal resource use.

Hungry Jack · Feb 27, 2026

prez77 said:
I short-handed the phrase "need to be" Should have written "need to be to satisfy the marketplace" which is objective setting aside the various behavioral critiques of manipulation of markets and demand. I would also say that the market value of the players is subject to the resources available to pay in the market. If the consumer is satisfied with a less expensive product, which they clearly were at one time, then the market value of the product is lower. There is no cardinal amount that the workers, I mean players, should be paid unless you entertain a labor theory of value, which the American economy doesn't. So I'll stick with my basic premise, the auction bid everything up and may, may, result in less than optimal resource use.

The labor theory of value holds in the big professional sports (Smith version)

CatManTrue · Feb 27, 2026

NFL salary cap over $300M per team. Across 32 teams, that’s $9.6B each year alone spend on the “major leagues”.

College football spending pales in comparison in the “minor leagues”.

NFL salary cap hits milestone at $301.2 million for 2026

The NFL salary cap has topped $300 million for the first time in league history, landing at $301.2 million for 2026.

www.espn.com

bringbacktherantboard · Feb 27, 2026

CatManTrue said:
NFL salary cap over $300M per team. Across 32 teams, that’s $9.6B each year alone spend on the “major leagues”.

College football spending pales in comparison in the “minor leagues”.

NFL salary cap hits milestone at $301.2 million for 2026

The NFL salary cap has topped $300 million for the first time in league history, landing at $301.2 million for 2026.

www.espn.com

What's the UFL salary cap?

katatonic2 · Feb 27, 2026

Purple Pile Driver said:
It’s a free market. If prices exceed what one perceives to be the value then demand declines. Happens to just about all products.

The irony is that the current situation is closer to an actual free market than what's seen in the NFL putting aside the total dollar amounts.

Salary cap, exemption from anti-trust laws to keep player comp down, but at the same time, expecting public financing of stadiums; billionaire owners are against free markers and are for socialism when it benefits them (but that doesn't stop those who equate the NFL w/ 'Murica...).

IU and Cig continue to get flack for "buying" their championship (isn't that the American way?), despite a good no of programs having spent significantly more; while NIL spending was up, Cig and IU still had to find value as they didn't quite have the budget (which has since seen a nice bump).

Bama under Saban was paying players, same thing for Wooden with his stretch of success with Bruin basketball.

While it hasn't borne fruit yet, Dook is spending tons on bb players, not to mention a QB (which got them a conference crown, albeit with the help of a completely moronic tiebreaker system).

Baz = Heisman · Mar 1, 2026

This is so gross. The game is no longer about education and the front of the jersey first. No one had issues for players getting paid for speaking appearances, their jersey sales, etc. but this true “pay for play” has muted any excitement I and many used to have for college sports. It was truly a tier above everything and special. Now it’s just another one of the pack… and the impact on players who don’t think about the bigger picture will be huge.

NU'06er · Mar 2, 2026

Baz = Heisman said:
This is so gross. The game is no longer about education and the front of the jersey first. No one had issues for players getting paid for speaking appearances, their jersey sales, etc. but this true “pay for play” has muted any excitement I and many used to have for college sports. It was truly a tier above everything and special. Now it’s just another one of the pack… and the impact on players who don’t think about the bigger picture will be huge.

It really just highlights the failings and greed of the NCAA to not set up a better system when they were still in position to do so. There could have been a different revenue sharing model, or at least some kind of a "player trust" set up to allow players to get their share but only after graduating so as to still make education paramount.

No one likes players being mercenaries abstractly -- I've agreed with you on that on other threads. But players themselves certainly don't have incentive to avoid that when they are getting paid. Nor do teams have any incentive to unilaterally disarm against competitors who are paying players.

It kind of reminds me of the MLB situation with Ohtani making more than several low-market teams all by himself. That's bad for baseball -- but it's good for players that there are teams like the Dodgers that will pay that kind of money, and it's good for the Dodgers that they can render half the league unable to compete before the season even begins. So how does it ever change when the negatives are all pushed onto the have-nots that have no power to do anything about it? No one cries for the "couldn't hack it" guys that get cut by the Deion Sanders of the world or the former athletes that never get a degree and spend all their NIL money before fading into obscurity -- and arguably there are more winners than losers in this new system with all the super seniors that get extra chances at being paid to play sports, and all the payouts to athletes that used to be 100% exploited instead of some lesser percentage exploited. But there definitely are losers in this system too. Is what it is, I guess.

AdamOnFirst · Mar 2, 2026

Hungry Jack said:
“Higher than they need to be”

You argument falls apart with that purely subjective statement.

You then point out that college football was previously operated more cheaply. This is because the players were providing subsidized labor for their performance. You basically make this point when you argue that players are “no less deserving of the millions” than professional players

When all the coaches agree to take a monster pay cut and we cap coach and facility spending I'm willing to discuss what the price "should be set at."

Baz = Heisman · Mar 2, 2026

AdamOnFirst said:
When all the coaches agree to take a monster pay cut and we cap coach and facility spending I'm willing to discuss what the price "should be set at."

They are the adults in the room. The kids are supposed to be learning how to be pros. It’s essentially an internship. You aren’t given the keys to your job the minute you turn 18. It’s not a right to play college football. That’s where this argument carries no merit about the coaches getting paid, blah blah.

CatManTrue · Mar 3, 2026

Baz = Heisman said:
This is so gross. The game is no longer about education and the front of the jersey first. No one had issues for players getting paid for speaking appearances, their jersey sales, etc. but this true “pay for play” has muted any excitement I and many used to have for college sports. It was truly a tier above everything and special. Now it’s just another one of the pack… and the impact on players who don’t think about the bigger picture will be huge.

What’s that about education?

I think this gentleman is a SEC fan:

katatonic2 · Mar 3, 2026

Baz = Heisman said:
This is so gross. The game is no longer about education and the front of the jersey first. No one had issues for players getting paid for speaking appearances, their jersey sales, etc. but this true “pay for play” has muted any excitement I and many used to have for college sports. It was truly a tier above everything and special. Now it’s just another one of the pack… and the impact on players who don’t think about the bigger picture will be huge.

You really think it was ever really about "education"? Lol

Baz = Heisman said:
They are the adults in the room. The kids are supposed to be learning how to be pros. It’s essentially an internship. You aren’t given the keys to your job the minute you turn 18. It’s not a right to play college football. That’s where this argument carries no merit about the coaches getting paid, blah blah.

Huh?

There's no "right" about playing any sport, whether it be in college, HS or the pros other than programs at all levels wanting to get the best players.

Athletes at the highest level have always been in it to maximize whatever benefits/compensation comes their way.

As Ed Oberon quipped - "We used to walk through the back door with the cash, now we walk through the front door'

So cfb head coaches coaching "interns"/"student athletes" be making generational wealth?

Why should cfb HCs (and to a lesser extent men's can HCs) should be making vastly more than coaches of other sports who are also coaching interns/student athletes?

They're basically doing the same job, but for different sports.

Heck, these days we have coordinators making $3+ million and S&C coaches making 7 figures - all for coaching interns. Lol

Going back to the whole education thing - do you really think university administrators (as a whole) really care about the education (never mind the health and safety) of cfb players as the regular season has expanded from 8 games to 10 to 12, with teams playing as many games as an NFL regular season if they make it to the national championship game?

Add on top of that the increased travel burden.

Unlike coaches, these players haven't seen their compensation increase when it was limited to a scholarship; whereas coaches have not only seen a ridiculous hike in their compensation, they, on top of that, still get bonuses for each step of the postseason (with players not getting anything for additional games).

katatonic2 · Mar 3, 2026

Speaking how silly football coach's compensation has become, Beverly Hills HS is paying somewhere around $205k to lure away one of the top HS coaches in CA in an attempt to turn around their downtrodden program (bet a no of coaches in Texas were already making close to that amount).

Not listed as the football coach, but some administrative mumbo jumbo title.

Baz = Heisman · Mar 9, 2026

katatonic2 said:
You really think it was ever really about "education"? Lol

Huh?

There's no "right" about playing any sport, whether it be in college, HS or the pros other than programs at all levels wanting to get the best players.

Athletes at the highest level have always been in it to maximize whatever benefits/compensation comes their way.

As Ed Oberon quipped - "We used to walk through the back door with the cash, now we walk through the front door'

So cfb head coaches coaching "interns"/"student athletes" be making generational wealth?

Why should cfb HCs (and to a lesser extent men's can HCs) should be making vastly more than coaches of other sports who are also coaching interns/student athletes?

They're basically doing the same job, but for different sports.

Heck, these days we have coordinators making $3+ million and S&C coaches making 7 figures - all for coaching interns. Lol

Going back to the whole education thing - do you really think university administrators (as a whole) really care about the education (never mind the health and safety) of cfb players as the regular season has expanded from 8 games to 10 to 12, with teams playing as many games as an NFL regular season if they make it to the national championship game?

Add on top of that the increased travel burden.

Unlike coaches, these players haven't seen their compensation increase when it was limited to a scholarship; whereas coaches have not only seen a ridiculous hike in their compensation, they, on top of that, still get bonuses for each step of the postseason (with players not getting anything for additional games).

Yes. It absolutely used to be about education and the student-athlete (wording in that order intentionally).

I would have NO issue if they set up a post-playing trust players got an equal share of after graduation and allowed players to get cuts of their jersey sales, speaking/video game appearances, charity sponsorships, etc. That’s what everyone was under the impression Name Image and Likeness was about when it was brought to the forefront. Not even the plaintiffs in that case thought it would get here to this “pay for play” crap.

Ask yourself… what’s college sports differentiator now? The bands?

The conferences got nuked, players are being paid to play, college hoops has literal pros in it… just wait until college hire contractors that don’t even go to school there.

Clueless people like you will love it. There’s a reason we have REGULATED capitalism as our economic system and it’s not a true free for all. Libertarians are naive as ****, and I have a feeling you’re probably one given your comments.

Baz = Heisman · Mar 9, 2026

katatonic2 said:
You really think it was ever really about "education"? Lol

Huh?

There's no "right" about playing any sport, whether it be in college, HS or the pros other than programs at all levels wanting to get the best players.

Athletes at the highest level have always been in it to maximize whatever benefits/compensation comes their way.

As Ed Oberon quipped - "We used to walk through the back door with the cash, now we walk through the front door'

So cfb head coaches coaching "interns"/"student athletes" be making generational wealth?

Why should cfb HCs (and to a lesser extent men's can HCs) should be making vastly more than coaches of other sports who are also coaching interns/student athletes?

They're basically doing the same job, but for different sports.

Heck, these days we have coordinators making $3+ million and S&C coaches making 7 figures - all for coaching interns. Lol

Going back to the whole education thing - do you really think university administrators (as a whole) really care about the education (never mind the health and safety) of cfb players as the regular season has expanded from 8 games to 10 to 12, with teams playing as many games as an NFL regular season if they make it to the national championship game?

Add on top of that the increased travel burden.

Unlike coaches, these players haven't seen their compensation increase when it was limited to a scholarship; whereas coaches have not only seen a ridiculous hike in their compensation, they, on top of that, still get bonuses for each step of the postseason (with players not getting anything for additional games).

Also, it’s hilarious to me that you’re a Northwestern fan and don’t care about the education aspect, clearly. Go become a fan of a football factory with basket weavers.

AdamOnFirst · Mar 9, 2026

Baz = Heisman said:
Also, it’s hilarious to me that you’re a Northwestern fan and don’t care about the education aspect, clearly. Go become a fan of a football factory with basket weavers.

Mean Girls Philly GIF by Philadelphia Union

katatonic2 · Mar 12, 2026

Baz = Heisman said:
Also, it’s hilarious to me that you’re a Northwestern fan and don’t care about the education aspect, clearly. Go become a fan of a football factory with basket weavers.

And you'd be wrong about me not caring.

I'm just not naive to think that many CFB (or BB) players care that much.

On his podcast, Taylor Lewan was asked what he told the admin at UM (when he hit campus) with regard to the type of classes he wanted to take.

His answer? Told them to sign him up for whatever, as he didn't care since he was headed for the NFL.

That Thompson transfer from Dook was surprised when he was expected to attended classes while in Evanston.

What makes you think whether players get compensated is going to affect whether they care about getting an education?

Those who always cared will continue to care and those who never cared will continue to not care.

Plus one thing player compensation has resulted in is the increase in players returning for their 4th or even 5th, 6th+ year of school, instead of heading for the NFL as soon as possible.

For someone who purports to be so concerned about the educational aspect - wouldn't you agree that players returning to finish their undergrad degree or get a grad degree is a good thing?

Btw, I'm also not naive to think that schools really care that much about the educational aspect (nevermind the health) with regard to players, otherwise they wouldn't keep expanding the regular season and playoffs (or have a month long tournament where players are flying all around the country).

katatonic2 · Mar 12, 2026

Baz = Heisman said:
This is so gross. The game is no longer about education and the front of the jersey first. No one had issues for players getting paid for speaking appearances, their jersey sales, etc. but this true “pay for play” has muted any excitement I and many used to have for college sports. It was truly a tier above everything and special. Now it’s just another one of the pack… and the impact on players who don’t think about the bigger picture will be huge.

Still sticking to the "education" fairy tale Lol

And oh, doing away with NIL will result in top Olympic athletes no longer competing
on the collegiate level.

Baz = Heisman · Mar 12, 2026

katatonic2 said:
Still sticking to the "education" fairy tale Lol

And oh, doing away with NIL will result in top Olympic athletes no longer competing
on the collegiate level.

They can make their decision. That’s their choice. There’s plenty of evidence it’s a bad one. Go ask Sebastian Telfair, for example. And please stop the gaslighting. Guys coming back for another year are staying for cash - not education. When you reward someone before they’ve accomplished anything it sets an insanely bad precedent. It has to be reigned back in or college sports might as well shut down.

NU'06er · Mar 13, 2026

Baz, I agree with you on a lot: It sucks that the "student" part of "student-athlete" is being devalued. It sucks that conferences are re-aligning around profit motives and TV contracts instead of maintaining traditional/regional rivalries. It sucks that players are more mercenary than ever, and in the most extreme cases playing for 6 and 7 different schools, using every year of eligibility and every waiver they can get for extra NIL cash grabs. It sucks that the player empowerment era means professionalization of amateur sports to such an extent that the transfer portal operates like free agency and fans of individual schools don't have the same opportunity to watch freshmen grow and mature into talents with the same team where they started.

Baz = Heisman said:
It has to be reigned back in or college sports might as well shut down.

But I think this is the main place I disagree with you.

College sports has all kinds of problems these days, but popularity is not one of them. People are frustrated, but they are still tuning in, just like the Dodgers are not hurting for eyes on Ohtani even if the imbalance kills baseball in places like Oakland and Pittsburgh.

100% agree college sports would be better off with some structural changes to re-emphasize education and make it less of a pure arms race financially. But I don't think any of that is an existential threat to college sports -- it's going to reshape the audience and price out a lot of have-nots (from lower tier schools to lower revenue sports/Title IX casualties), but that's only happening because the "haves" are simultaneously doing so well in this system as to suffocate the rest of it.

It's annoying. But people are gonna watch college playoff games between Ohio State-Notre Dame-Alabama-Georgia-Michigan-Oregon etc. and complain that Tulanes/James Madisons don't belong every single year, even while they pretend to complain out of the other corner of their mouth that the Tulanes/James Madisons can't keep up.

My $0.02...

Purple Pile Driver · Mar 13, 2026

NU'06er said:
Baz, I agree with you on a lot: It sucks that the "student" part of "student-athlete" is being devalued. It sucks that conferences are re-aligning around profit motives and TV contracts instead of maintaining traditional/regional rivalries. It sucks that players are more mercenary than ever, and in the most extreme cases playing for 6 and 7 different schools, using every year of eligibility and every waiver they can get for extra NIL cash grabs. It sucks that the player empowerment era means professionalization of amateur sports to such an extent that the transfer portal operates like free agency and fans of individual schools don't have the same opportunity to watch freshmen grow and mature into talents with the same team where they started.

But I think this is the main place I disagree with you.

College sports has all kinds of problems these days, but popularity is not one of them. People are frustrated, but they are still tuning in, just like the Dodgers are not hurting for eyes on Ohtani even if the imbalance kills baseball in places like Oakland and Pittsburgh.

100% agree college sports would be better off with some structural changes to re-emphasize education and make it less of a pure arms race financially. But I don't think any of that is an existential threat to college sports -- it's going to reshape the audience and price out a lot of have-nots (from lower tier schools to lower revenue sports/Title IX casualties), but that's only happening because the "haves" are simultaneously doing so well in this system as to suffocate the rest of it.

It's annoying. But people are gonna watch college playoff games between Ohio State-Notre Dame-Alabama-Georgia-Michigan-Oregon etc. and complain that Tulanes/James Madisons don't belong every single year, even while they pretend to complain out of the other corner of their mouth that the Tulanes/James Madisons can't keep up.

My $0.02...

The flaw i see in this argument is that the “haves” are suffocating everyone else. Indiana just won a Natty in CFB. Are they a traditional “have”? The old school “haves” are complaining about the BYU’s, Texas Tech’s and Indiana’s. Programs can turn around in 1-2 season's and the 4 year rebuilds are a thing of the past. No longer are National Champions relegated to a group of 10 or so teams.

Yes, the stealing players and broken NIL are slimey. I dont think anyone disputes that. There needs to be enforceable rules to try a curtail this shady behavior. However, the term “student-athlete has been a joke for 50 years. Saw it up close and personal. Baz’s college athletics version of Utopia harkens back to the 1950’s.

NU'06er · Mar 13, 2026

Purple Pile Driver said:
The flaw i see in this argument is that the “haves” are suffocating everyone else. Indiana just won a Natty in CFB. Are they a traditional “have”? The old school “haves” are complaining about the BYU’s, Texas Tech’s and Indiana’s. Programs can turn around in 1-2 season's and the 4 year rebuilds are a thing of the past. No longer are National Champions relegated to a group of 10 or so teams.

Yes, the stealing players and broken NIL are slimey. I dont think anyone disputes that. There needs to be enforceable rules to try a curtail this shady behavior. However, the term “student-athlete has been a joke for 50 years. Saw it up close and personal. Baz’s college athletics version of Utopia harkens back to the 1950’s.

Fair counterpoint. I'm not convinced Indiana won't be the exception rather than the rule as we get more of a sample size to the NIL era. But there's no denying that team came from nothing.

I recognize that this is an example from the 4-team playoff era rather than the expanded playoff era, but I suspect the TCU-Georgia national title game will start to feel more emblematic of what's achievable and not over time. Non-traditional upstarts (like TCU) are more likely to get a shot in an expanded playoff than they were when the gatekeeping was harsher (Boise State, UCF, etc.), but because that shot requires them to survive a gauntlet of playoff games likely including road games now, the value of that shot is less neutral than before and more rewarding toward teams loaded with enough depth to survive attrition. That TCU team threw everything it had at upsetting Michigan and had nothing left by the time it got to the final round.

Over time, as the Ohio States of the world not only get the majority of the 5-star recruits but also get to correct for their misses by stealing additional talent in the portal, I think they are going to wear down "puncher's chance" opponents going forward more often than not.

CFB breaks the bank with its first 40,000.000 dollar roster

Senior

All-Conference

All-American

All-Conference

All-American

All-Conference

Senior

All-Conference

All-American

All-Conference

All-American

Senior

All-Conference

All-American

Junior

All-Conference

All-Conference

All-Conference

All-Conference

Junior

All-Conference

All-American

Senior

Sophomore

Junior

Sophomore

All-Conference

Junior

All-American

Sophomore

Sophomore

Junior

Junior

All-Conference

Sophomore

Sophomore

Junior

Sophomore

All-Conference

Sophomore