This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

I'm not a Title IX compliance expert, but you may be think- by VaDblDmr

ing of it a little too narrowly by just focusing on "scholarships." I'm pretty dubious that making athletes in one male sport -- football -- employees and not doing so in any others would pass Title IX muster. If they do that, then I think it's in for a penny, in for a pound, and all sports at the school would have to be treated that way with equal wages for men and women. Now maybe you could give each athlete a choice of how to receive their total cost of attendance, i.e. either all cash/no class or status quo, but I'm not sure doing that moves the needle all that much. Some football players would still opt for the education, and those that don't might be underwhelmed with their net take-home after taxes and living expenses (if they aren't in a dorm with training table). In any event, I'm not sure how the math works out in that world, and I'm not sure it ultimately puts those schools in a better position to compete in football.

NIL avoids this problem because schools aren't the ones compensating the players for endorsements.

I don't disagree, however, in your overall point that we are headed for a downsizing of number of top conference college football teams.