Scott Gildea

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

@SportBeatTweet @racertodd without antitrust exemption NCAA and conferences have no ability to enforce their own rules. Nevertheless, what Lane Kiffin, the lawyers, and others are doing to regain exploit eligibility is unfortunate for the good of the sport.

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

@coachZMac @RossDellenger @YahooSports Without some sort of anti-trust exemption the NCAA has limited authority. I work with schools to navigate this space and raise capital if needed. Number on there list of frustrations in the inability to enforce rules they have in place.

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

This is great for a one time infusion of capital. However, what I see a lot from discussions about with schools and true private capital firms is the lack of a business plan to deploy the capital. Paying players or operating expenses is not the ideal use of funds. Better use is to scale up the athletic department looking for ways to add additional, reoccurring revenue sources.

Totally unrelated, but while money for athletic department is an issue the two higher pain points are the inability to enforces rules and people at the Board of Regents level sticking their finger in athletics.

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

The media rights study we did was an independent study looking at pooled rights for a media rights with a select group of schools. Whatever regulations are or were in place wasn’t relevant.

You proved my point with your second comment. The culture is every school and conference for themselves. The P2 would get more media revenue if the top 50-60 combined. But that would mean the 50-60 schools are equal. P2 would rather take lower media rights and keep the gap with the Big 12/ACC. Already saw the ACC shift revenue share based on school viewership with the same starting to leak inside model leak from the Big 10.

Look at the NFL. Parity is your friend. The margin of error is thin and fans are more engaged. Imagine the Packers, Bengals, or Browns negotiating their own TV deal compared the LA and NY teams.

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

This has nothing to do with the PCSA. It’s just a look the media rights potential for college football as a whole. May or may not ever happen but would solve a lot of problems for schools. Similar to what pool media rights did for the NFL. My firm has done some studies on a pool media rights deal.

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

Need to figure which schools make the cut. Brings up another cultural issue. Coaches, schools, conferences looking out for what benefits them best versus. I get it, I went to an SEC school that thrives now. However, the top schools as a whole could gen a much larger media deal. Packers almost went under prior to the 1961 broadcasting act as their media market deal alone wasn’t big at all.

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

@tricknole @WinterSportsLaw on number 2, it is assumed the media rights deals would evolve 50-70 schools. Not all schools.

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

@WinterSportsLaw Digging into the numbers, college football is second to NFL in viewership (and double the NBA) with the SEC leading the way. College football media rights combined is 1/3 of NBA and 1/5 of NFL. On a media value per viewer it’s even worse. NFL and college way under market.

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

@WinterSportsLaw He’s right in that collective bargaining needs to be explored. A collective bargaining agreement combined with a FMV media rights deal for college football is a strong solution. Look at the NFL. Need to figure out the on each side of the CBA, but it can be done.

[Scott Gildea @GildeaScot18764]

@RossDellenger @YahooSports The rev share and retention must now be paid directly by the school. No washing through vendors, third parties, collectives, etc. So a donor can just donate money directly to an athletic department that can be considered revenue that can it turn be used to pay players, correct?