This is an evolving idea I’ve had on how a college sports draft might work, in order to bring sanity back to the current climate. The below example is for football, but it could be tweaked for other sports as well. Would love feedback on why it would or would not work.
Core Idea:
A draft system can coexist with player freedom and unlimited compensation, using a hybrid of MLB’s signability model and NIL-era realities. It aims to balance:- Player choice
- School flexibility
- Financial incentives
- Legal/contractual freedom
Key Principles:
- No earnings caps — athletes can earn from scholarships, revenue share, and 3rd-party deals if they meet contract/draft terms.
- No forced transfers or school limitations — movement is always possible; restrictions are contractual, not institutional.
- No one is forced to play anywhere — players can always choose their destination, though with different financial outcomes.
The Draft Framework:
- P4-only, 25 picks/school/year.
- Eligible players = HS, JUCO, transfers, or currently unaffiliated athletes.
- Pre-draft pre-agreements = non-binding for eligibility / school of choice, but semi-binding for compensation allowances. Documented compensation plans filed with CSC.
- Draft rights = give schools exclusive full-compensation rights for 1 year. No control beyond that.
- Compensation = Unlimited for drafted players, via all three income streams (scholarship, rev share, 3rd party).
Free Agency: Four Tiers
| Tier | Scenario | Compensation Limits |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Skipped draft (e.g., chose school directly) | No scholarship/rev share for 1 year; 3rd party only |
| 2 | Broke signed pre-agreement | Scholarship only for 1st year |
| 3 | Undrafted | No restrictions (all income streams allowed) |
| 4 | Drafted but no pre-agreement, didn’t sign | Scholarship + rev share only (no 3rd party for 1st year) |
- Players can re-up their contracts after 1 year or re-enter the draft.
Contracts, Trading, and Compliance:
- Contracts can be 1+ years, but must end by eligibility expiration.
- Pick trading allowed; player trading prohibited (too academically messy).
- Appeals and compensatory picks exist for agreement breaches.
Use Cases Tested:
- 5* prospect → maximize NIL via draft or elite-tier free agency.
- 2* dream-school hopeful → still has pathways through draft or free agency tiers, though tradeoffs exist.
Why It Could Work:
- Provides structure without restriction.
- Makes recruiting more transparent and contract-based.
- Aligns with professionalization of college sports.
- Schools still get development pipelines.
- Legally respects players as professionals (or semi-pros) while preserving choice.
Possible Hurdles:
- Blueblood resistance: They lose some informal recruiting dominance.
- Administrative complexity: Managing pre-agreements, free agency rules, and enforcement would require a robust central body (CSC).
- Legal grey zones: NCAA’s future role, Title IX implications, and labor law precedents will be hotly contested.
Bottom Line:
Your system is thoughtful, player-centric, and adaptable—a structured middle ground between chaos and control. It could work if key power players are forced (or incentivized) to prioritize fair market dynamics over tradition.Fire away.