Tennessee fans, are you sure you want college football to be overhauled?

Sure, the NCAA is public enemy No. 1 in Knoxville after it launched another investigation into the Vols. This time, it’s over name, image and likeness rules that were, at best, vague when UT tested them.

But now college football is mulling players becoming employees and unionizing.

The SEC and the Big Ten are hinting at breaking away from the NCAA for an NFL-style super conference. And collective bargaining and revenue sharing are becoming part of college football parlance.

The sport needs fixing. But what’s being discussed isn’t your grandpa’s college football.

Amid so much confusion, what should UT fans be rooting for in the next stage of the sport? It’s hard to say because there are so many unknowns.

But here are some pros and cons to help you pick a preferred path.

What happens if there are no NIL rules?

This could be coming soon, like in a few days.

If a federal judge grants a preliminary injunction on NIL rules in the state of Tennessee’s lawsuit against the NCAA at the Feb. 13 hearing in Greeneville, it really will be the wild, wild west in college sports.

The landscape will be recognizable because everything that’s done in secret now in NIL will be out in the open, and college athletes technically will remain amateurs.

High school players and transfers will be permitted to negotiate with NIL collectives affiliated with teams and choose a school based on what that collective can pay. The highest bidder won’t always get the player, but the player will know for certain what he’ll be paid before enrolling at a school.

PROS: You get what you pay for. Spyre Sports Group, which manages UT’s collective, has been ahead of the pack since NIL was allowed in July 2021. And now there will be no NCAA rules to rein it in. The sky is the limit, maybe.

This is perhaps the most agreeable model to traditional fans because it pays the players without dismantling the structure of college football. But it could get out of hand.

CONS: Bidding wars drive up prices, which means players will cost more.

And that means collectives will beg fans to give even more money aside from what they already pay for tickets, concessions, team apparel and travel expenses to road games.

UT fans, how much are you willing to pay for a recruit or transfer who may or may not pan out?

Again, this is already the landscape. But once bidding is permitted, players and recruits will take advantage of the free market.

TOPPMEYER Could SEC, Big Ten leave NCAA? Here are 4 more realistic outcomes of new alliance

What if players become employees and unionize?

There are a lot of hurdles here, especially conflicting labor laws among states. And how many schools could afford to do this – 30, 40, 50?

But if there’s a way to solve it, college football may be headed in this direction.

One possible solution is that players would be employed by their university, but they would organize under an existing union to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with the SEC.

Another model calls for the football team to separate from public universities but maintain a financial partnership to keep up the appearance that they’re still one entity.

If that happens, imagine NFL rules for college football. There could be a salary cap per team, a rookie salary pool for each signing class, contract terms that limit when a player can transfer and free agency after contracts expire.

PROS: It perhaps would stabilize the sport. With a collective bargaining agreement in place, federal antitrust lawsuits would end and rules would be clear-cut.

Player movement would be more manageable because employment contracts could rein in the transfer market. And salaries would be public – either accessible through open records requests to public universities or leaked by boastful agents, as they are in the NFL.

CONS: College football as we’ve always known it would be over.

Fans wouldn’t be rooting for just a student-athlete who attends their alma mater. They’d be critiquing a 19-year-old who has union dues, paid time off and a pension. And players’ pay likely would be public, which adds a challenge to team chemistry.

The sport would be the same between the white lines. But the spirit might disappear.

Also, don’t assume that contracts would solve every personnel problem. What happens when a low-paid three-star recruit becomes an All-SEC player and wants to renegotiate his long-term contract?

Get ready for darkhorse Heisman candidates to hold out for a new contract in August.

What if the SEC and Big Ten break away?

This is unlikely because SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti have expressed their desire to keep the nationwide format of college football together.

But don’t underestimate the willingness of the two most powerful conferences to act in their own interests and separate from the College Football Playoff.

Remember the SEC weakened the Big 12 by taking Texas A&M and Missouri in 2021 and Texas and Oklahoma in 2024. The Big Ten erased the Pac-12 by taking USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington in 2024. So they're capable of doing something drastic.

PROS: Conferences would make their own rules so the NCAA would leave UT alone forever.

UT would have a seat at the lead table. After the great divide, the Vols would be among the elite teams in the sport and every game would carry significance.

That’s a plus for most fans. Rather than UConn and UTSA softening the schedule, UT’s easiest nonconference games would come against Northwestern and Rutgers. But is that really better?

CONS: Forget shooting for a 10-win season. An 8-4 record would be spectacular in such a competitive super league.

But unlike the NFL, the worst team wouldn't get the No. 1 draft pick, so rebuilding a program would be extremely difficult.

NCAA VS. TENNESSEE IN COURT Don't mistake NCAA's early lead for a final result

What if SEC shares revenue with players?

Schools in power conferences generate a lot of revenue, which is what started this whole “pay the players” debate years ago. Media rights deals bring in a lot money.

So why not cut out the middleman of NIL collectives and just pay the players directly from the pot of gold?

The SEC and Big Ten appear to be exploring ways this would work. It could involve elements of other models like unionizing and collective bargaining.

PROS: NIL collectives likely would still exist for traditional endorsement deals, but that wouldn’t be the primary source of income for most players. That means fans wouldn’t be on the hook directly to fund recruiting efforts to land a five-star recruit.

CONS: If the schools get less TV revenue from the conference stash, won’t they pass along those losses to fans? Don’t be surprised if ticket prices rise to compensate.

Also, there would be fights over fair revenue-sharing for athletes in Olympic sports. If football generates revenue and volleyball doesn’t, should athletes on those teams get the same share? If they don’t, there could be Title IX issues.

There's no easy solution. For now, college football may be searching for the best among bad ideas.

Adam Sparks is the Tennessee football beat reporter. Email adam.sparks@knoxnews.com. X, formerly known as Twitter@AdamSparks. Support strong local journalism by subscribing at knoxnews.com/subscribe.

Get the latest news and insight on SEC football by subscribing to the SEC Unfiltered newsletter, delivered straight to your inbox.

This article originally appeared on Knoxville News Sentinel: Tennessee players as employees or no NIL rules? Pros, cons, what's next?