I'm all for the free market, but in this case not quite sure.
There would be such a competitive disadvantage to team like us who don't have the wealthy donors that the big state schools do. I'm not naive enough to think that this isn't already happening on some level, however, don't think you can just say "recruit goes to the highest bidder" in this instance.
This is completely wrong.
People always ignore supply in this equation. As long as there are still only 85 scholarships, then there's not going to be a reallocation of talent away from anyone, on average. And big money schools, if they get into price wars, will quickly tire of it -- because they'll wind up with over-investment in kids who don't develop (because that happens), and then start pushing them out. Meanwhile, after two years of taking all the top kids (if that happened), the sell would get tough -- why would a kid from elsewhere travel out of state to sit on the bench at Alabama when he could get paid to stay at home and play earlier for the local school? And local kids will still prefer to stay local. That's where their friends, family and baby mommas be at. And the price range for most kids won't be that varied or high. Going from Miami to Tuscaloosa will sound good until the first few kids get sent home when they turn out not to be worth the money they were promised (or they just don't get what they were promised). Word gets around.
What people often fail to realize is that deregulation generally
lowers prices.
I disagree. Because why would it have to stop at 85. If kids are getting paid then someone can pay them enough to go to school and have extra money so then Alabama and LSU end up with rosters of over 100 kids.
We could never compete in a college football free market. We would have to focus on basketball and baseball.
First of all, the scholarship comes with a contract. Boosters could pay a kid enough to enroll for a semester (though that would be a pretty inefficient use of their money considering they could get free tuition by taking a scholarship, and the kid would prefer a fancy car), but they might not pay the next semester. Even if some kids are dumb enough to fall for that, their coaches and parents would likely not be.
Secondly, why in the world do people think the top HS kids would want to go to, say, Alabama if they have 120 kids ahead of them on the team? As long as they only get to play 11 at a time, the market will sort itself out. As someone above noted, kids realize that the prize is the NFL, not a few sheckels for college. And you're not going to help your chances to get there if you have to wait 3 years to see the field.
The allure of playing near friends, families and baby mommas is always going to be attractive. And there's enough money in So Fla to make it competitive.
It's just not true that there would be some structural salary concept at other schools that would price UM out of the neighborhood. Maybe a kid or few each year gets poached somewhere, but I doubt the net result would be any different than we see now.
And kids do get paid now. Anyone thinking otherwise is naive.
