"Congressional scrutiny of the NCAA's handling of student athletics is growing, with members of Congress asking pointed questions of top officials over the treatment and benefits offered to student athletes.

As bills emerge to force colleges and universities to make good on scholarships that cover four years of education -- and as legal challenges seek financial rewards and union rights for athletes -- NCAA officials should stand warned that lawmakers are pressing for action to address perceived inequities, Rep. Tony Cardenas said in the latest episode of the ESPN podcast series "Capital Games."

"We're hearing from young people who say, 'Well, as soon as I got hurt, all of a sudden my scholarship was gone and I didn't have the wherewithal to finish school," said Cardenas, D-Calif., a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee."...

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...aa-actions

No surprise - it's a perfect opportunity for political grandstanding so this guy can claim how he's "fighting for your rights" at re-election time. Not that I'm cynical of politicians' motivations....

(06-24-2014 12:48 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  "Congressional scrutiny of the NCAA's handling of student athletics is growing, with members of Congress asking pointed questions of top officials over the treatment and benefits offered to student athletes.

As bills emerge to force colleges and universities to make good on scholarships that cover four years of education -- and as legal challenges seek financial rewards and union rights for athletes -- NCAA officials should stand warned that lawmakers are pressing for action to address perceived inequities, Rep. Tony Cardenas said in the latest episode of the ESPN podcast series "Capital Games."

"We're hearing from young people who say, 'Well, as soon as I got hurt, all of a sudden my scholarship was gone and I didn't have the wherewithal to finish school," said Cardenas, D-Calif., a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee."...

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...aa-actions

This is a very important development. Members of Congress have an electoral and democratic incentive to address issues that people are paying attention to. With the popularity of college football and the growing drumbeat of reform, I look for more representatives to join Cardenas.

(06-24-2014 01:09 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  No surprise - it's a perfect opportunity for political grandstanding so this guy can claim how he's "fighting for your rights" at re-election time. Not that I'm cynical of politicians' motivations....

So much for the P5's massive level of protection because they so dominate the congress. Fact is, they don't dominate the congress and it wouldn't matter even if they did. They don't dominate the electorate---which is far more important to any incumbent that the school they attended 30 or 40 years ago. If the NCAA and the P5 turn into the next convenient whipping boy, the congressional P5 alumni will jump on board the lynch mob railroad as soon as it leaves the station. These guys just want to get some beneficial face time on the tube.

Interesting that this representative is from California and that USC would be the first school to get out in front of this thing by offering 4 year scholarships.

(06-24-2014 01:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 01:09 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  No surprise - it's a perfect opportunity for political grandstanding so this guy can claim how he's "fighting for your rights" at re-election time. Not that I'm cynical of politicians' motivations....

So much for the P5's massive level of protection because they so dominate the congress. Fact is, they don't dominate the congress and it wouldn't matter even if they did. They don't dominate the electorate---which is far more important to any incumbent that the school they attended 30 or 40 years ago. If the NCAA and the P5 turn into the next convenient whipping boy, the congressional P5 alumni will jump on board the lynch mob railroad as soon as it leaves the station. These guys just want to get some beneficial face time on the tube.

True enough, but there's also many times when politicians will do something just for the sake of grandstanding, or to make their record factually accurate even if it's not reflective of how they vote when push comes to shove.

For example, a great many congressional districts have been gerrymandered to the point that they're shoo-ins for one party or the other, but there are a few (like mine) that may lean one way but which are genuinely in play. In cases like that, a politician will often vote with the other party on bills where their party has either a big advantage or disadvantage (or in other words, cases where their specific vote won't really matter) so they can factually assert their "independent voting record" during election cycles, even if they vote in lockstep with their party leadership in cases where every vote does count.

Congressional pressure helps the cause if the P5 IMO. This puts pressure on smaller schools to keep what little they now have instead of losing everything if the P5 left.

(06-24-2014 01:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  So much for the P5's massive level of protection because they so dominate the congress. Fact is, they don't dominate the congress and it wouldn't matter even if they did. They don't dominate the electorate---which is far more important to any incumbent that the school they attended 30 or 40 years ago. If the NCAA and the P5 turn into the next convenient whipping boy, the congressional P5 alumni will jump on board the lynch mob railroad as soon as it leaves the station. These guys just want to get some beneficial face time on the tube.

This isn't a lynch mob. This is politicians telling colleges to give athletes more money. Something the P5 have wanted to do for a while.

I don't understand why you think political involvement on this issue works against the P5 in any way.

(06-24-2014 03:33 PM)TomThumb Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 01:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  So much for the P5's massive level of protection because they so dominate the congress. Fact is, they don't dominate the congress and it wouldn't matter even if they did. They don't dominate the electorate---which is far more important to any incumbent that the school they attended 30 or 40 years ago. If the NCAA and the P5 turn into the next convenient whipping boy, the congressional P5 alumni will jump on board the lynch mob railroad as soon as it leaves the station. These guys just want to get some beneficial face time on the tube.

This isn't a lynch mob. This is politicians telling colleges to give athletes more money. Something the P5 have wanted to do for a while.

I don't understand why you think political involvement on this issue works against the P5 in any way.

Maybe because the P5 commissioners are currently sitting in a courtroom claiming that giving student athletes a few dollars for the use of their likeness will destroy college sports. Just sayin....Besides, once hearings start, theres going to be a push that ALL D1 college athletes be treated right. That will then cause a good look into how college footballs revenue sharing playoff access is handled.

Ive already said where I think this is headed if we want to keep something similar to the current model alive. It will require a legislative solution where the NCAA gets an anti-trust exemption in exchange for a level of governmental regulation guaranteeing the safety/welfare of student athletes and equal/open access to the playoff system for all schools. It will still be an eat what you kill world for media contracts, but at least the playoff access/money will be equally shared, which will allow all D1 athletes to get the same proper and fair treatment.

Many parts of college football most importantly the financial considerations on all levels will see the light of day.
Joe public who does not watch football gets a vote and will in the end have a say in college football and what is fair. There is no end to what congress can and will demand of the ncaa.

Why yes Congressman, we'd love to give them more, but theres this issue of all these other schools who don't want us to be able to do the right thing. I know we can count on your support when we lobby the NCAA for a separate, P5 only branch of the NCAA that allows us to take care of these young student athletes!

Not such a blessing to your cause now is it?

I know you desperately want congress to mandate a seat at the table for the G5 but it aint happening.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/...cart_river

imo the big ten like the little dutch boy trying to get their finger in the dike.

When its all said and done the p5 has the most to lose.

(06-24-2014 05:29 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Why yes Congressman, we'd love to give them more, but theres this issue of all these other schools who don't want us to be able to do the right thing. I know we can count on your support when we lobby the NCAA for a separate, P5 only branch of the NCAA that allows us to take care of these young student athletes!

Not such a blessing to your cause now is it?

I know you desperately want congress to mandate a seat at the table for the G5 but it aint happening.

Except they are not saying that....they are saying giving player any likeness-use compensation would destroy the Big10. Plus "there are 6,615 D1 players not covered by your risky scheme Mr Greedy-P5-Commissioner. Is it not true Commissioner Greedy, that if the half billion dollars from the CFP was equally shared---Couldn't ALL D1 athletes recieve those same safety and welfare benefits?" Still feeling as confident?

If this goes into the legislative venue it's going to be about the student athlete, college idealism, sportsmanship, fair play, and the American way. That's the last things the P5 wants it to be about. Im sure the P5 doesn't want it in the Congress--but they soon might if they lose the O'Bannon case (which is not looking to good for the NCAA right now). The Congress is the only place to get an antitrust exemption...and I think that's the only real hope of saving anything close to the current model for college football.

As for the G5, we might in fact benefit from Congress looking closely at college football. We really have little to lose. If a anti-trust exemption is the answer, the G5 is virtually guaranteed to get long term protection from the deal. My guess is the P5 really wouldn't mind. They would get to do what they want (they would get voting control of big time college football away from the small D1 schools that don't even play the game). Yes, the P5 would probably have to deal with some governmental protection from overreaching and boxing out the G5---but the P5 would be free from lawsuits, largely be able to run things the way they wish. The P5 could concentrate on just chasing the money. The G5, would continue to be worth less than the P5---but they would have realistic access to the playoffs and be able to treat their players as well for the most part as P5 schools. The playoffs would still likely be dominated by the P5---there would just be a little Cinderella factor introduced. lol....you're always so angry 10th. Honestly, would what I described really be such a horrible outcome for everyone?

(06-24-2014 06:39 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 05:29 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Why yes Congressman, we'd love to give them more, but theres this issue of all these other schools who don't want us to be able to do the right thing. I know we can count on your support when we lobby the NCAA for a separate, P5 only branch of the NCAA that allows us to take care of these young student athletes!

Not such a blessing to your cause now is it?

I know you desperately want congress to mandate a seat at the table for the G5 but it aint happening.

Except they are not saying that....they are saying giving player any likeness-use compensation would destroy the Big10. Plus "there are 6,615 D1 players not covered by your risky scheme Mr Greedy. P5 Commisioner. Mr Commissioner, if the half billion dollars from the CFP was equally shared, couldn't ALL D1 athletes recieve those same safety and welfare benefits?" Still feeling as confident?

If this goes into the legislative venue it's going to be about the student athlete, college idealism, sportsmanship, and fair play. That's the last things the P5 wants it to be about. Im sure the P5 doesn't want it in the Congress--but they soon might if they lose the O'Bannon case (which is not looking to good for the NCAA right now). The Congress is the only place to get an antitrust exemption...and I think that's the only real hope of saving anything close to the current model for college football.

Either of you could turn out to be right. If this lands in the political arena all bets are off as to the outcome and who will benefit and who will suffer. Congress is an unpredictable animal in most respects. The only certainty is that it will try to spin whatever action it takes as good for voters.

Attack Coogs "take their money and give it to us" mentality is exactly what's wrong with this country.

Thankfully there is zero chance his fantasy of the government taking UTs money and giving it to UH because UH can't earn for itself is just that: a fantasy

The threat to the P5 is a congressman asking why the federal government has to help subsidize attendance by average kids when a school is generating $100 million on athletics and paying a coach $7 million.

The other threat is a congressman or legislator asking why a far more academically qualified student is denied admission at a top name school in favor of a marginal student who can play football very well.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(06-24-2014 07:14 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Attack Coogs "take their money and give it to us" mentality is exactly what's wrong with this country.

Thankfully there is zero chance his fantasy of the government taking UTs money and giving it to UH because UH can't earn for itself is just that: a fantasy

Actually, in the system I described---only the playoff money would be evenly distributed. The SEC would keep all their Sugar Bowl Access Bowl money, all their own SEC network money, all thier TV contract money, ect. It would be eat what you kill system---just like now. Only the playoff money would be evenly split (which would be higher because there would be more games in order to make it more inclusive). I agree with you. UH has no right to Longhorn or Aggie money and I don't advocate that.

Here's the flaw: the NCAA is not the US department of college sports. None of the universities are federal universities. The NCAA is a private club.

The Fedgov has NO authority to dictate the NCAA structure or who chooses to participate or NOT participate in that structure.

(06-24-2014 07:35 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Here's the flaw: the NCAA is not the US department of college sports. None of the universities are federal universities. The NCAA is a private club.

The Fedgov has NO authority to dictate the NCAA structure or who chooses to participate or NOT participate in that structure.

Correct. In the scenario I describe, the NCAA would grant the government some level of control in exchange for an anti-trust exemption. The anti-trust exemption would allow the schools in the NCAA to continue to operate pretty much a they have with "amateur" athletes receiving scholarships with a preset value that is agreed upon by all the schools. Of course, the student athlete benefits would be more like the current P5 proposal, but collusion to set a standard amount and standard benefits would be allowed due to the anti-trust exemption (this is where they are losing the O'Bannon case--but it would be allowed with an anti-trust exemption coupled with governmental regulation to protect the players).

Any school (or conference) would be free to leave the NCAA if they wish, but they would no longer be allowed to collude with other conferences to set the value of a scholarship. Schools outside of the protection of the NCAA's anti-trust exemption would have to utilize a free market system (pay for play, employee style system probably with a players union). My guess is the P5 would prefer to stay under the NCAA's umbrella, but they would be completely free to leave it they wish.