How much does a bad college football season cost universities?
Word on the street is Texas canceled a meeting with Under Armour, so the smart money is on the Longhorns sticking with Nike. With a right of first refusal, Nike had the advantage from the jump. Texas ranked second last year in royalty revenue, according to the Collegiate Licensing Company, who handles licensing for many of the nation's top universities. That's not a property Nike is going to be willing to lose.
I expect the new deal from Nike for Texas will unseat Michigan's 15-year, $169 million deal from earlier this year. Even with the Longhorns having a down year on the field, the brand is still one the most valuable in college sports.
When on-field performance effects on-campus recruiting
Speaking of having a down year, what's the impact on schools like Auburn and Oregon who were projected to have big years and, well ... aren't?
One study found enrollment increases by an average of 4.4% for a football team who finishes the season ranked in the AP Top 10.
Take the 2012 Arkansas team as an example. The Razorbacks began the season ranked 8th in the nation before going a disappointing 4-8. If Arkansas had instead finished the season in the AP Top 10 and experienced the 4.4% percent growth in enrollment, it could have meant a huge boost for the university. Keeping in-state and out-of-state proportions the same as they were the previous school year (even though football success tends to boost out-of-state enrollment), Arkansas would have made an additional $9.6 million per year those students remained enrolled.
Missed opportunities and big bucks indeed.
No trust fund for student athletes
There's been big news over the past week about money and whether or not student athletes are getting more of it. The appellate ruling in the O'Bannon case struck down the idea of allowing funds to be placed in trust for student athletes up to $5,000 annually. The portion of the ruling which said the NCAA cannot prohibit schools from paying up to cost-of-attendance was upheld, but since it's already being implemented across the country, it's mostly become a moot point.
The really interesting thing will be what happens with the Alson and Jenkins cases. The Alston case seeks to provide cost-of-attendance money to former student athletes, so the O'Bannon ruling could be great for that case. The Jenkins case, on the other hand, seeks to create a free market economy in college athletics. That's a longer shot, especially since the O'Bannon ruling mentioned "amateurism" and talked about it like it's a real thing (which many would debate). Definitely cases to keep your eye on.
MORE FROM CAMPUS INSIDERS:
Saturday spoiler alert: Week 6
Coaches sound-off: Week 6
Inside the College Football Playoff rankings