Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
Author Message
cubucks Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,158
Joined: Apr 2015
Reputation: 440
I Root For: tOSU/UNL/Ohio
Location: Athens, Ohio
Post: #101
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 08:47 AM)colohank Wrote:  
(10-04-2019 03:15 PM)cubucks Wrote:  I hope they all make as much money as possible. All off their own name, I see no problem here. Sign autographs at the local car dealership for $5 a pop? What's the problem with that? They are still making millions for their universities yet the university doesn't have to spend one additional dime in this new law.

Whiling away the hours, charging $5.00 a pop for signing autographs at a local automobile dealer instead of studying. Sounds like a great idea, and I'm sure Congress would approve since most members spend a bulk of their time on the phone begging for campaign contributions instead of legislating. Meanwhile, what's Joe Sixpack going to do with all of those $5.00 autographs he's paid for and collected from no-name college athletes?
Are you concerned about students on academic scholarship out making money rather than studying?

Is it anyone's business what you buy and do with your money? No it's not, same applies here.
10-07-2019 08:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #102
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-04-2019 04:54 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(10-04-2019 12:58 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(10-02-2019 10:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(10-02-2019 10:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(10-02-2019 10:06 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  It doesn't compute in my brain that we can have this massive college sports industrial complex financed by billions of dollars of TV revenue, donations, and sponsorships and we can then sit here and claim that the actual athletes that fuel all of that getting compensated would suddenly be a bridge too far.

Here's the thing, though: Would Zion have been able to make some pretty big endorsement bucks while at Duke last year? Yes.

But, would Zion have made those same bucks if he was in the D-League? I very much doubt it.

So yes, the athletes do "fuel" this to an extent. But, a significant part of their value is that they are representing universities that are themselves big brand names with huge fan bases and lots of national TV exposure. Zion playing for Duke is worth something, Zion playing for the Albany Salmoncatchers of the ABL is worth a lot less.

So i can imagine that big schools might try to capture some of this value by insisting on a cut of whatever endorsement deals their players sign.

Kind of like how record companies are getting artists to sign "360 degree" contracts that give the record company a cut of concert ticket sales, merchandising, celebrity endorsements, etc.

Of course in the end, the market will sort that out. But the point for me is let's not pretend the star athlete is the *only* driver of value here. The school uniform matters greatly too.

Sure, but it's all circular and symbiotic because the schools are deriving value from having those elite level athletes. Duke basketball has massive brand value, but it only has such brand value because it has a consistent standard of having among the best teams in Division I college basketball. It can't just start trotting out Division III athletes and retain that brand value. The Duke brand certainly adds to the endorsement potential of Zion - there's no question about that. However, it also takes players like Zion and other top level athletes to sustain that Duke brand.

In fact, that's what makes college football and basketball so uniquely popular compared to, say, college baseball. There's a symbiotic merger of a brand that where there's an intense emotional connection (the school itself) and the top athletes for that particular level. If you take away the school brand, then you have minor league sports teams without the intense emotional connection. If you take away the top athletes for that particular level, then you have something more akin to college baseball (which isn't nearly as popular) or Division II/III sports that draw little interest.

All of it is intertwined for college football and basketball. You need both the school brands AND the elite athletes for the whole economic system to work.

FWIW, you could say the exact same thing about pro sports. LeBron James doesn't make the money that he makes today if the NBA didn't exist. You could argue that his market value is nothing if he's not on an NBA roster. However, the NBA doesn't work as an entity if elite athletes like LeBron James don't join their league. The Lakers can't just trot out random players on the court any more than Duke can and expect the multi-billion dollar valuation that they have as a franchise. You need BOTH the branding AND the elite talent for the economic system to run correctly.

Actually, I disagree with this. If the NBA lost its best athletes to other sports or other leauges, I don't think the NBA's revenues would change much.

The NFL loses great athletes to baseball all the time because MLB pays more and offers a better post-career health. Charlie Ward, the Heisman Trophy winner, went to the NBA. Hasn't affected NFL profits one bit.


Even if the NBA started losing players to, say, the Spanish or French league, it wouldn't change the Lakers' revenue - leagues in the USA will outdraw foreign leagues because the USA is still the biggest sports market in the world.

Look at the the Japanese baseball league - despite regularly losing its best players to the USA, it has higher average attendance than MLB and $1.3 billion in revenue for just 12 teams. And Look at MLS - among soccer leagues it ranks 22 in player salary but 6th in attendance, despite being practically brand new and actively hated by most people over 40 years old.

Losing the best athletes to other sports is something that is largely out of the control of leagues (e.g. Kyler Murray choosing the NFL over MLB, Charlie Ward choosing the NBA over the NFL, etc.).

However, losing the best players in your own sport to other leagues in that sport is definitely something that isn't sustainable, especially in a market like the United States where we expect to watch the best of the best. The brand value of all of the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL are based on the fact that they are the number one leagues in the world in their respective sports by a wide margin. Period. Sure, there could be an outlier out there of a star still playing baseball in Japan or playing basketball in Spain, but there isn't a question that virtually all of the very best players in the world still come to the US leagues for football, basketball, baseball and hockey and they receive outsized super-premium valuations are based on that fact. It is internalized in our brains that we are watching the best of the best in those sports, so if that is eroded, interest and valuations go down accordingly.

You point to the Japanese league making $1.3 billion in revenue, but the Los Angeles Dodgers by themselves sold for over $2 billion. Major League Baseball dwarfs Japanese baseball in terms of market valuations. The disparity is even greater in basketball and hockey, while American football barely exists anywhere else. We're spoiled Americans where we get all of the best athletes in virtually every sport except for soccer... and you can see how interest and valuations for MLS clubs are a fraction compared to their Premier League and other top European club counterparts (where their club values are in the billions of dollars, too).

Saying that the Lakers could just trot out random players while the Spanish league could grab top basketball players is a false notion because Americans simply don't put up with that crap. If we're not watching the best of the best, then we largely ignore it. Just look at our Olympics coverage as a microcosm: we breathlessly cover the US athletes and teams that are in position to win gold medals while ignoring everyone else (whether they're from our country or a different country).

We can apply this to college sports, too. If all that matters is school pride and branding, why don't we watch Division III sports en masse? Why do more people watch FBS football over FCS football? Why do more people watch Power 5 schools over Group of 5 schools? Why do more people watch Alabama and Ohio State compared to Vanderbilt and Rutgers? It's because we have internalized that the best athletes *at that level* are playing at the top programs in the Power Five... and that's what drives their valuation. Once again, there can be outliers (e.g. an excellent UCF or Boise State team or great players that come out of FCS), but it's the penumbra effect of having that consistent critical mass of talent at that power schools year after year after year that sustains the branding and revenue. When you remove that consistent critical mass of talent, the whole thing falls apart.

As a result, you truly can't just trot out Division III talent at Ohio State and expect 110,000 people to still show up (or trot out G-League talent with the Lakers and expect to sustain their valuations). There's a symbiotic combination of top level talent for that level with the school branding and pride that creates value that is greater than the sum of its parts - essentially, 1 + 1 = 3.

To use an analogy, when I pay to see, say, Hamilton on Broadway or downtown Chicago, I may not know the specific actors playing the parts. However, when I'm paying a few hundred dollars per ticket plus my time and energy to travel to watch the show, I'm still expecting top level quality and talent to be on stage. If they just trot out a community theater cast, I'm going to notice it right away and it's not going to be a satisfactory experience no matter how much I like the songs. I know the difference between a Broadway cast and a community theater cast, just as I know the difference between a Division III team and a Division I team or an MLB team and a minor league baseball team. Americans that are watching sports expect Broadway-level talent (regardless of whether it's pro or college) and they're not going to pay for anything less.

On the other hand, how do you explain the popularity of Kentucky and South Carolina football?04-cheers

Seriously, UK looked like a MAC team 10 years ago relative to the rest of the SEC. Yet they still drew 60k+ a game.
10-07-2019 10:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #103
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-03-2019 10:55 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  IMO there are two major groups who hate this idea (for now).

The Schools: They are afraid of the money - this will morph into their bill and they will have to pay everyone from the equestrian team to the football team; and they will lose school endorsement deals and the money will go straight to the kids and take them out of the equation... not to mention the NCAA chits for the major tournament appearances.


The Fans (the ones who don't like it obviously): There are really two subgroups of haters here.

- The first are the ones who think these kids are already lucky and privileged enough to get free school. To me that is just jealousy. 95% of the "school bill" doesn't even pay for education costs anymore, it is all fees and administration BS.
- The second are the sky screamers who firmly believe that corruption will take over and the T. Boon Pickens of the world (god rest his soul) will just buy everything in sight for their school

Right now, the money paid out is hidden and there is a lot of it nobody knows about (or willfully ignores - see Rick Pitino)... Put it on the table for all to see, that actually will level the playing field not distort it. Yes some school will have more aggressive buyers than others, but that is life and that is already in play behind the scenes - expose it.

The NCAA f'kd this up royally years ago when they selectively enforced rules.... I think Calapari once said while at Umass.... [to paraphrase] Kentucky got caught, University of New Orleans is in a lot of trouble for this! If they had done their job and truly practiced what they preached about this stuff instead of thinking about the affects of punishing UNC or Kentucky (for example) on the cash register.... a lot of this inequity babble would never have existed.

There are really three groups of people who are for professionalization of college sports:

Those who are hypothetically for free markets everywhere and don't care about the collateral damage;
Those who are jealous of the money made by the institutions and want to "get them;" and
Pro sports fans who don't understand anything about college sports.

In other words, y'all are all ignorant sluts.04-cheers
10-07-2019 10:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
e-parade Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,631
Joined: Apr 2015
Reputation: 433
I Root For: UMass
Location:
Post: #104
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 10:06 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-03-2019 10:55 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  IMO there are two major groups who hate this idea (for now).

The Schools: They are afraid of the money - this will morph into their bill and they will have to pay everyone from the equestrian team to the football team; and they will lose school endorsement deals and the money will go straight to the kids and take them out of the equation... not to mention the NCAA chits for the major tournament appearances.


The Fans (the ones who don't like it obviously): There are really two subgroups of haters here.

- The first are the ones who think these kids are already lucky and privileged enough to get free school. To me that is just jealousy. 95% of the "school bill" doesn't even pay for education costs anymore, it is all fees and administration BS.
- The second are the sky screamers who firmly believe that corruption will take over and the T. Boon Pickens of the world (god rest his soul) will just buy everything in sight for their school

Right now, the money paid out is hidden and there is a lot of it nobody knows about (or willfully ignores - see Rick Pitino)... Put it on the table for all to see, that actually will level the playing field not distort it. Yes some school will have more aggressive buyers than others, but that is life and that is already in play behind the scenes - expose it.

The NCAA f'kd this up royally years ago when they selectively enforced rules.... I think Calapari once said while at Umass.... [to paraphrase] Kentucky got caught, University of New Orleans is in a lot of trouble for this! If they had done their job and truly practiced what they preached about this stuff instead of thinking about the affects of punishing UNC or Kentucky (for example) on the cash register.... a lot of this inequity babble would never have existed.

There are really three groups of people who are for professionalization of college sports:

Those who are hypothetically for free markets everywhere and don't care about the collateral damage;
Those who are jealous of the money made by the institutions and want to "get them;" and
Pro sports fans who don't understand anything about college sports.

In other words, y'all are all ignorant sluts.04-cheers

Or:

Those of us who don't want free markets everywhere, want people to be able to make money for things like writing a book without being punished (see the Div III golfer who was kicked out of the NCAA because he wrote a book about golfing), and also don't care if there's collateral damage to a system we already view as extremely broken.

That last bit is the key part. The system is broken right now, and quite frankly I'd be fine with it burning to the ground and starting fresh if it means it'll eventually get to a better working order.


I don't anticipate it to burn to the ground, that's only the stance of those of you who seem to think the sky will fall, and somehow boosters will be able to completely run everything as if there won't be any precautions put in place to prevent people from signing potential recruits to come to their favorite schools by offering them money before signing...or that somehow players who weren't considered good enough to earn scholarships would suddenly be deemed worthy enough to businesses to pay for their entire education. Like really, do you honestly believe a walk-on that barely sees the field would be a marketable person to that degree? If this is done right, a player would first need to turn down a scholarship offer elsewhere to come as a walk-on to a top program (not crazy, it does happen), and then have some booster or business decide to step in get them as part of a marketing campaign high profile enough to cover the costs in order to...keep them at a school they already decided to attend despite not really having a measurable impact on the team to that point?

You do realize it would be entirely possible and encouraged to have communications leading up to the actual exchange of money tracked and monitored to make sure nothing fishy is going on right? Just allowing people to be paid for their likeness doesn't instantly turn it into open season where recruiting violations no longer exist.
10-07-2019 10:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #105
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 10:36 AM)e-parade Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 10:06 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-03-2019 10:55 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  IMO there are two major groups who hate this idea (for now).

The Schools: They are afraid of the money - this will morph into their bill and they will have to pay everyone from the equestrian team to the football team; and they will lose school endorsement deals and the money will go straight to the kids and take them out of the equation... not to mention the NCAA chits for the major tournament appearances.


The Fans (the ones who don't like it obviously): There are really two subgroups of haters here.

- The first are the ones who think these kids are already lucky and privileged enough to get free school. To me that is just jealousy. 95% of the "school bill" doesn't even pay for education costs anymore, it is all fees and administration BS.
- The second are the sky screamers who firmly believe that corruption will take over and the T. Boon Pickens of the world (god rest his soul) will just buy everything in sight for their school

Right now, the money paid out is hidden and there is a lot of it nobody knows about (or willfully ignores - see Rick Pitino)... Put it on the table for all to see, that actually will level the playing field not distort it. Yes some school will have more aggressive buyers than others, but that is life and that is already in play behind the scenes - expose it.

The NCAA f'kd this up royally years ago when they selectively enforced rules.... I think Calapari once said while at Umass.... [to paraphrase] Kentucky got caught, University of New Orleans is in a lot of trouble for this! If they had done their job and truly practiced what they preached about this stuff instead of thinking about the affects of punishing UNC or Kentucky (for example) on the cash register.... a lot of this inequity babble would never have existed.

There are really three groups of people who are for professionalization of college sports:

Those who are hypothetically for free markets everywhere and don't care about the collateral damage;
Those who are jealous of the money made by the institutions and want to "get them;" and
Pro sports fans who don't understand anything about college sports.

In other words, y'all are all ignorant sluts.04-cheers

Or:

Those of us who don't want free markets everywhere, want people to be able to make money for things like writing a book without being punished (see the Div III golfer who was kicked out of the NCAA because he wrote a book about golfing), and also don't care if there's collateral damage to a system we already view as extremely broken.

That last bit is the key part. The system is broken right now, and quite frankly I'd be fine with it burning to the ground and starting fresh if it means it'll eventually get to a better working order.


I don't anticipate it to burn to the ground, that's only the stance of those of you who seem to think the sky will fall, and somehow boosters will be able to completely run everything as if there won't be any precautions put in place to prevent people from signing potential recruits to come to their favorite schools by offering them money before signing...or that somehow players who weren't considered good enough to earn scholarships would suddenly be deemed worthy enough to businesses to pay for their entire education. Like really, do you honestly believe a walk-on that barely sees the field would be a marketable person to that degree? If this is done right, a player would first need to turn down a scholarship offer elsewhere to come as a walk-on to a top program (not crazy, it does happen), and then have some booster or business decide to step in get them as part of a marketing campaign high profile enough to cover the costs in order to...keep them at a school they already decided to attend despite not really having a measurable impact on the team to that point?

You do realize it would be entirely possible and encouraged to have communications leading up to the actual exchange of money tracked and monitored to make sure nothing fishy is going on right? Just allowing people to be paid for their likeness doesn't instantly turn it into open season where recruiting violations no longer exist.

Of course we think that. We think that because the law that ACTUALLY PASSED in California and the laws currently being proposed in other legislature DO NOT have any such protections against NIL laws being used to support pay-for-play sham "endorsement" deals. Truth be told---its going to be very difficult to create legal language that separates legitimate endorsement deals from pay-for-play sham "endorsement" deals (which is precisely why the current NCAA rules regarding NIL are so restrictive---they saw how easy it would be for NIL income to become a slippery slope to pay-for-play and opted to simply ban it all ). As ive said before---I understand and am sympathetic to the concern for the athletes---I just dont know how you fix it without effectively creating a pro pay-for-play league.
(This post was last modified: 10-07-2019 12:45 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-07-2019 12:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #106
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
Mike Aresco's take---

“You can’t have states basically trying to have a mishmash of laws dealing with what is a national undertaking,” Aresco told the Orlando Sentinel. “This is a national enterprise and it’s got to be governed nationally by the NCAA office.

“As far as I’m concerned, universities should have every right to maintain an amateur model, and if you don’t like it, go to the [NBA] G-League. It’s up to you, but it’s a choice you can make.”

The Fair Pay for Play Act, or SB 206, was signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law allows college athletes in the state to be paid for use of their name, image and likeness. It goes into effect in 2023.

“There is such simplistic thinking about this and what it can mean,” Aresco said. “No one is forced to go to these schools and enjoy a full scholarship and all of the other benefits that can run up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Most students would certainly love to have that opportunity.”



https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c...story.html
(This post was last modified: 10-07-2019 12:58 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-07-2019 12:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
e-parade Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,631
Joined: Apr 2015
Reputation: 433
I Root For: UMass
Location:
Post: #107
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 12:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 10:36 AM)e-parade Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 10:06 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-03-2019 10:55 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  IMO there are two major groups who hate this idea (for now).

The Schools: They are afraid of the money - this will morph into their bill and they will have to pay everyone from the equestrian team to the football team; and they will lose school endorsement deals and the money will go straight to the kids and take them out of the equation... not to mention the NCAA chits for the major tournament appearances.


The Fans (the ones who don't like it obviously): There are really two subgroups of haters here.

- The first are the ones who think these kids are already lucky and privileged enough to get free school. To me that is just jealousy. 95% of the "school bill" doesn't even pay for education costs anymore, it is all fees and administration BS.
- The second are the sky screamers who firmly believe that corruption will take over and the T. Boon Pickens of the world (god rest his soul) will just buy everything in sight for their school

Right now, the money paid out is hidden and there is a lot of it nobody knows about (or willfully ignores - see Rick Pitino)... Put it on the table for all to see, that actually will level the playing field not distort it. Yes some school will have more aggressive buyers than others, but that is life and that is already in play behind the scenes - expose it.

The NCAA f'kd this up royally years ago when they selectively enforced rules.... I think Calapari once said while at Umass.... [to paraphrase] Kentucky got caught, University of New Orleans is in a lot of trouble for this! If they had done their job and truly practiced what they preached about this stuff instead of thinking about the affects of punishing UNC or Kentucky (for example) on the cash register.... a lot of this inequity babble would never have existed.

There are really three groups of people who are for professionalization of college sports:

Those who are hypothetically for free markets everywhere and don't care about the collateral damage;
Those who are jealous of the money made by the institutions and want to "get them;" and
Pro sports fans who don't understand anything about college sports.

In other words, y'all are all ignorant sluts.04-cheers

Or:

Those of us who don't want free markets everywhere, want people to be able to make money for things like writing a book without being punished (see the Div III golfer who was kicked out of the NCAA because he wrote a book about golfing), and also don't care if there's collateral damage to a system we already view as extremely broken.

That last bit is the key part. The system is broken right now, and quite frankly I'd be fine with it burning to the ground and starting fresh if it means it'll eventually get to a better working order.


I don't anticipate it to burn to the ground, that's only the stance of those of you who seem to think the sky will fall, and somehow boosters will be able to completely run everything as if there won't be any precautions put in place to prevent people from signing potential recruits to come to their favorite schools by offering them money before signing...or that somehow players who weren't considered good enough to earn scholarships would suddenly be deemed worthy enough to businesses to pay for their entire education. Like really, do you honestly believe a walk-on that barely sees the field would be a marketable person to that degree? If this is done right, a player would first need to turn down a scholarship offer elsewhere to come as a walk-on to a top program (not crazy, it does happen), and then have some booster or business decide to step in get them as part of a marketing campaign high profile enough to cover the costs in order to...keep them at a school they already decided to attend despite not really having a measurable impact on the team to that point?

You do realize it would be entirely possible and encouraged to have communications leading up to the actual exchange of money tracked and monitored to make sure nothing fishy is going on right? Just allowing people to be paid for their likeness doesn't instantly turn it into open season where recruiting violations no longer exist.

Of course we think that. We think that because the law that ACTUALLY PASSED in California and the laws currently being proposed in other legislature DO NOT have any such protections against NIL laws being used to support pay-for-play sham "endorsement" deals. Truth be told---its going to be very difficult to create legal language that separates legitimate endorsement deals from pay-for-play sham "endorsement" deals (which is precisely why the current NCAA rules regarding NIL are so restrictive---they saw how easy it would be for NIL income to become a slippery slope to pay-for-play and opted to simply ban it all ). As ive said before---I understand and am sympathetic to the concern for the athletes---I just dont know how you fix it without effectively creating a pro pay-for-play league.

There are already restrictions built into the bill. You can't sign a contract with Nike if you go to an Adidas school. You won't be able to do an ad for Pepsi if you go to a Coke school, things along those lines. While this specifically does nothing to address your concerns, it does show that it's not the wild west and things can be included as amendments to the bill (and potentially put in place nationally to then address the concerns of different states having different rules).

With the bill not taking effect until 2023, there's time for the NCAA to actually come back and say "We will allow for NIL and your continues participation in the NCAA if these additional precautions are met"



This bill forces the NCAA to actually do something for once. You all are acting like this is the final way it's going to look and not that a **** ton is going to change over the next 4 years.
10-07-2019 01:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jdgaucho Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,271
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 108
I Root For: UCSB
Location: Big West Land
Post: #108
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
I'm leaning in favor of this bill at the moment. And quute frankly, I believe my school is one which can BENEFIT from it.

Ya know, location, location, location...
10-07-2019 01:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,883
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 898
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #109
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 12:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Mike Aresco's take---

“You can’t have states basically trying to have a mishmash of laws dealing with what is a national undertaking,” Aresco told the Orlando Sentinel. “This is a national enterprise and it’s got to be governed nationally by the NCAA office.

“As far as I’m concerned, universities should have every right to maintain an amateur model, and if you don’t like it, go to the [NBA] G-League. It’s up to you, but it’s a choice you can make.”

The Fair Pay for Play Act, or SB 206, was signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law allows college athletes in the state to be paid for use of their name, image and likeness. It goes into effect in 2023.

“There is such simplistic thinking about this and what it can mean,” Aresco said. “No one is forced to go to these schools and enjoy a full scholarship and all of the other benefits that can run up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Most students would certainly love to have that opportunity.”



https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c...story.html


These two statements don't match up.......
10-07-2019 02:36 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #110
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 02:36 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 12:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Mike Aresco's take---

“You can’t have states basically trying to have a mishmash of laws dealing with what is a national undertaking,” Aresco told the Orlando Sentinel. “This is a national enterprise and it’s got to be governed nationally by the NCAA office.

“As far as I’m concerned, universities should have every right to maintain an amateur model, and if you don’t like it, go to the [NBA] G-League. It’s up to you, but it’s a choice you can make.”

The Fair Pay for Play Act, or SB 206, was signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law allows college athletes in the state to be paid for use of their name, image and likeness. It goes into effect in 2023.

“There is such simplistic thinking about this and what it can mean,” Aresco said. “No one is forced to go to these schools and enjoy a full scholarship and all of the other benefits that can run up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Most students would certainly love to have that opportunity.”



https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c...story.html


These two statements don't match up.......

Agree. This has nothing to do with Star Trek.

That said, the first definition of "enterprise"--

en·ter·prise
/ˈen(t)ərˌprīz/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
a project or undertaking, typically one that is difficult or requires effort
10-07-2019 02:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #111
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 01:30 PM)e-parade Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 12:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 10:36 AM)e-parade Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 10:06 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-03-2019 10:55 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  IMO there are two major groups who hate this idea (for now).

The Schools: They are afraid of the money - this will morph into their bill and they will have to pay everyone from the equestrian team to the football team; and they will lose school endorsement deals and the money will go straight to the kids and take them out of the equation... not to mention the NCAA chits for the major tournament appearances.


The Fans (the ones who don't like it obviously): There are really two subgroups of haters here.

- The first are the ones who think these kids are already lucky and privileged enough to get free school. To me that is just jealousy. 95% of the "school bill" doesn't even pay for education costs anymore, it is all fees and administration BS.
- The second are the sky screamers who firmly believe that corruption will take over and the T. Boon Pickens of the world (god rest his soul) will just buy everything in sight for their school

Right now, the money paid out is hidden and there is a lot of it nobody knows about (or willfully ignores - see Rick Pitino)... Put it on the table for all to see, that actually will level the playing field not distort it. Yes some school will have more aggressive buyers than others, but that is life and that is already in play behind the scenes - expose it.

The NCAA f'kd this up royally years ago when they selectively enforced rules.... I think Calapari once said while at Umass.... [to paraphrase] Kentucky got caught, University of New Orleans is in a lot of trouble for this! If they had done their job and truly practiced what they preached about this stuff instead of thinking about the affects of punishing UNC or Kentucky (for example) on the cash register.... a lot of this inequity babble would never have existed.

There are really three groups of people who are for professionalization of college sports:

Those who are hypothetically for free markets everywhere and don't care about the collateral damage;
Those who are jealous of the money made by the institutions and want to "get them;" and
Pro sports fans who don't understand anything about college sports.

In other words, y'all are all ignorant sluts.04-cheers

Or:

Those of us who don't want free markets everywhere, want people to be able to make money for things like writing a book without being punished (see the Div III golfer who was kicked out of the NCAA because he wrote a book about golfing), and also don't care if there's collateral damage to a system we already view as extremely broken.

That last bit is the key part. The system is broken right now, and quite frankly I'd be fine with it burning to the ground and starting fresh if it means it'll eventually get to a better working order.


I don't anticipate it to burn to the ground, that's only the stance of those of you who seem to think the sky will fall, and somehow boosters will be able to completely run everything as if there won't be any precautions put in place to prevent people from signing potential recruits to come to their favorite schools by offering them money before signing...or that somehow players who weren't considered good enough to earn scholarships would suddenly be deemed worthy enough to businesses to pay for their entire education. Like really, do you honestly believe a walk-on that barely sees the field would be a marketable person to that degree? If this is done right, a player would first need to turn down a scholarship offer elsewhere to come as a walk-on to a top program (not crazy, it does happen), and then have some booster or business decide to step in get them as part of a marketing campaign high profile enough to cover the costs in order to...keep them at a school they already decided to attend despite not really having a measurable impact on the team to that point?

You do realize it would be entirely possible and encouraged to have communications leading up to the actual exchange of money tracked and monitored to make sure nothing fishy is going on right? Just allowing people to be paid for their likeness doesn't instantly turn it into open season where recruiting violations no longer exist.

Of course we think that. We think that because the law that ACTUALLY PASSED in California and the laws currently being proposed in other legislature DO NOT have any such protections against NIL laws being used to support pay-for-play sham "endorsement" deals. Truth be told---its going to be very difficult to create legal language that separates legitimate endorsement deals from pay-for-play sham "endorsement" deals (which is precisely why the current NCAA rules regarding NIL are so restrictive---they saw how easy it would be for NIL income to become a slippery slope to pay-for-play and opted to simply ban it all ). As ive said before---I understand and am sympathetic to the concern for the athletes---I just dont know how you fix it without effectively creating a pro pay-for-play league.

There are already restrictions built into the bill. You can't sign a contract with Nike if you go to an Adidas school. You won't be able to do an ad for Pepsi if you go to a Coke school, things along those lines. While this specifically does nothing to address your concerns, it does show that it's not the wild west and things can be included as amendments to the bill (and potentially put in place nationally to then address the concerns of different states having different rules).

With the bill not taking effect until 2023, there's time for the NCAA to actually come back and say "We will allow for NIL and your continues participation in the NCAA if these additional precautions are met"



This bill forces the NCAA to actually do something for once. You all are acting like this is the final way it's going to look and not that a **** ton is going to change over the next 4 years.

Those restrictions have absolutely nothing to do with preventing a third party pay-for-play environment in college sports. I'd also ad that the Florida law, is very similar to the Cali law, and will be effective in 2020 if it passes---so the idea there is a long time before these laws take effect is not necessarily correct.
(This post was last modified: 10-07-2019 02:45 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-07-2019 02:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #112
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
How much do these scholarships cost to give to these kids plus the FCOAs and room and board? 4 years could cost over $100,000 alone depending on the school. That is compensation there. You have to earn it. It can't be handed to you by laws from different states.
10-07-2019 02:44 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #113
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 10:36 AM)e-parade Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 10:06 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-03-2019 10:55 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  IMO there are two major groups who hate this idea (for now).

The Schools: They are afraid of the money - this will morph into their bill and they will have to pay everyone from the equestrian team to the football team; and they will lose school endorsement deals and the money will go straight to the kids and take them out of the equation... not to mention the NCAA chits for the major tournament appearances.


The Fans (the ones who don't like it obviously): There are really two subgroups of haters here.

- The first are the ones who think these kids are already lucky and privileged enough to get free school. To me that is just jealousy. 95% of the "school bill" doesn't even pay for education costs anymore, it is all fees and administration BS.
- The second are the sky screamers who firmly believe that corruption will take over and the T. Boon Pickens of the world (god rest his soul) will just buy everything in sight for their school

Right now, the money paid out is hidden and there is a lot of it nobody knows about (or willfully ignores - see Rick Pitino)... Put it on the table for all to see, that actually will level the playing field not distort it. Yes some school will have more aggressive buyers than others, but that is life and that is already in play behind the scenes - expose it.

The NCAA f'kd this up royally years ago when they selectively enforced rules.... I think Calapari once said while at Umass.... [to paraphrase] Kentucky got caught, University of New Orleans is in a lot of trouble for this! If they had done their job and truly practiced what they preached about this stuff instead of thinking about the affects of punishing UNC or Kentucky (for example) on the cash register.... a lot of this inequity babble would never have existed.

There are really three groups of people who are for professionalization of college sports:

Those who are hypothetically for free markets everywhere and don't care about the collateral damage;
Those who are jealous of the money made by the institutions and want to "get them;" and
Pro sports fans who don't understand anything about college sports.

In other words, y'all are all ignorant sluts.04-cheers

Or:

Those of us who don't want free markets everywhere, want people to be able to make money for things like writing a book without being punished (see the Div III golfer who was kicked out of the NCAA because he wrote a book about golfing), and also don't care if there's collateral damage to a system we already view as extremely broken.

That last bit is the key part. The system is broken right now, and quite frankly I'd be fine with it burning to the ground and starting fresh if it means it'll eventually get to a better working order.


I don't anticipate it to burn to the ground, that's only the stance of those of you who seem to think the sky will fall, and somehow boosters will be able to completely run everything as if there won't be any precautions put in place to prevent people from signing potential recruits to come to their favorite schools by offering them money before signing...or that somehow players who weren't considered good enough to earn scholarships would suddenly be deemed worthy enough to businesses to pay for their entire education. Like really, do you honestly believe a walk-on that barely sees the field would be a marketable person to that degree? If this is done right, a player would first need to turn down a scholarship offer elsewhere to come as a walk-on to a top program (not crazy, it does happen), and then have some booster or business decide to step in get them as part of a marketing campaign high profile enough to cover the costs in order to...keep them at a school they already decided to attend despite not really having a measurable impact on the team to that point?

You do realize it would be entirely possible and encouraged to have communications leading up to the actual exchange of money tracked and monitored to make sure nothing fishy is going on right? Just allowing people to be paid for their likeness doesn't instantly turn it into open season where recruiting violations no longer exist.

My comment was a satire. Most people probably missed the old SNL reference.
But the serious part-collateral damage-I'm talking about the athletes in sports other than football and basketball, the athletes who aren't stars, the academic programs that won't be getting money back (Texas gives over $10 million a year), the open takeover of programs and players by sponsors, the financial burden on schools that aren't part of the P5, ...

The NCAA is a mess. The book thing is a bureaucracy run amok. I am pretty sure he did not really violate their rules. But they make it up as they go. They penalize Penn St. for a nasty incident that involved an ex-coach and a non-student, but can't penalize UNC for making a mockery of the idea of student and athlete. And they nail Georgia Tech to the wall for an agent giving a player $300 of clothes which he reimbursed for once caught. They nail USC to the wall because they didn't control agents but didn't do anything of significance that actually gave them an advantage on the field. Montana gets a relative slap on the wrist for protecting rapists to keep them playing, but since its FCS and not highly publicized, the NCAA doesn't care that much. I'm fine if the NCAA gets burned to the ground. Its all the other things I'm concerned about.
10-07-2019 04:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,019
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #114
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 12:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Mike Aresco's take---

“You can’t have states basically trying to have a mishmash of laws dealing with what is a national undertaking,” Aresco told the Orlando Sentinel. “This is a national enterprise and it’s got to be governed nationally by the NCAA office.

“As far as I’m concerned, universities should have every right to maintain an amateur model, and if you don’t like it, go to the [NBA] G-League. It’s up to you, but it’s a choice you can make.”

The Fair Pay for Play Act, or SB 206, was signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law allows college athletes in the state to be paid for use of their name, image and likeness. It goes into effect in 2023.

“There is such simplistic thinking about this and what it can mean,” Aresco said. “No one is forced to go to these schools and enjoy a full scholarship and all of the other benefits that can run up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Most students would certainly love to have that opportunity.”



https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c...story.html

Aresco is all in favor of an "amateur model" that somehow manages to pay him $2 million a year. Professional for me, amateur for you.

03-lmfao
10-07-2019 04:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,883
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 898
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #115
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 02:39 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 02:36 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 12:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Mike Aresco's take---

“You can’t have states basically trying to have a mishmash of laws dealing with what is a national undertaking,” Aresco told the Orlando Sentinel. “This is a national enterprise and it’s got to be governed nationally by the NCAA office.

“As far as I’m concerned, universities should have every right to maintain an amateur model, and if you don’t like it, go to the [NBA] G-League. It’s up to you, but it’s a choice you can make.”

The Fair Pay for Play Act, or SB 206, was signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law allows college athletes in the state to be paid for use of their name, image and likeness. It goes into effect in 2023.

“There is such simplistic thinking about this and what it can mean,” Aresco said. “No one is forced to go to these schools and enjoy a full scholarship and all of the other benefits that can run up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Most students would certainly love to have that opportunity.”



https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c...story.html


These two statements don't match up.......

Agree. This has nothing to do with Star Trek.

That said, the first definition of "enterprise"--

en·ter·prise
/ˈen(t)ərˌprīz/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
a project or undertaking, typically one that is difficult or requires effort


Also...from the Cambridge English Dictionary:

"an organization, especially a business, or a difficult and important plan, especially one that will earn money:

Don't forget this is a commercial enterprise - we're here to make money.

Those were the years of private enterprise (= businesses being run privately, rather than by the government), when lots of small businesses were started."
(This post was last modified: 10-07-2019 04:12 PM by TerryD.)
10-07-2019 04:11 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #116
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 04:06 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 12:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Mike Aresco's take---

“You can’t have states basically trying to have a mishmash of laws dealing with what is a national undertaking,” Aresco told the Orlando Sentinel. “This is a national enterprise and it’s got to be governed nationally by the NCAA office.

“As far as I’m concerned, universities should have every right to maintain an amateur model, and if you don’t like it, go to the [NBA] G-League. It’s up to you, but it’s a choice you can make.”

The Fair Pay for Play Act, or SB 206, was signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law allows college athletes in the state to be paid for use of their name, image and likeness. It goes into effect in 2023.

“There is such simplistic thinking about this and what it can mean,” Aresco said. “No one is forced to go to these schools and enjoy a full scholarship and all of the other benefits that can run up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Most students would certainly love to have that opportunity.”



https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c...story.html

Aresco is all in favor of an "amateur model" that somehow manages to pay him $2 million a year. Professional for me, amateur for you.

03-lmfao

lol...I made the comment on the AAC board, but the more I look at it---the only people really consistently making any money on college sports are the coaches. Even Aresco's salary is joke compared to many HC salaries. As money poured into the game, coaches benefited the most.
(This post was last modified: 10-07-2019 04:14 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-07-2019 04:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PirateTreasureNC Offline
G's up, Ho's Down ; )
*

Posts: 36,249
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 617
I Root For: ECU Pirates,
Location:
Post: #117
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
My cynical nature tells me pay to play is already here and alive and well. The people that don't want to give up the money and the power are the universities that profit from the media deals.

There is too much money in collegiate sports( read revenue sports) for parties to not want a cut of it. And the other angle there is, the revenue sports in collegiate athletics generate the funds that pay for all of a school's non-revenue sports so....

I get a inner chuckle about the amateurism angle used by the ones getting the cut of money.
10-07-2019 06:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Mav Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,332
Joined: Jul 2016
Reputation: 155
I Root For: Omaha
Location:
Post: #118
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 10:06 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-03-2019 10:55 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  IMO there are two major groups who hate this idea (for now).

The Schools: They are afraid of the money - this will morph into their bill and they will have to pay everyone from the equestrian team to the football team; and they will lose school endorsement deals and the money will go straight to the kids and take them out of the equation... not to mention the NCAA chits for the major tournament appearances.


The Fans (the ones who don't like it obviously): There are really two subgroups of haters here.

- The first are the ones who think these kids are already lucky and privileged enough to get free school. To me that is just jealousy. 95% of the "school bill" doesn't even pay for education costs anymore, it is all fees and administration BS.
- The second are the sky screamers who firmly believe that corruption will take over and the T. Boon Pickens of the world (god rest his soul) will just buy everything in sight for their school

Right now, the money paid out is hidden and there is a lot of it nobody knows about (or willfully ignores - see Rick Pitino)... Put it on the table for all to see, that actually will level the playing field not distort it. Yes some school will have more aggressive buyers than others, but that is life and that is already in play behind the scenes - expose it.

The NCAA f'kd this up royally years ago when they selectively enforced rules.... I think Calapari once said while at Umass.... [to paraphrase] Kentucky got caught, University of New Orleans is in a lot of trouble for this! If they had done their job and truly practiced what they preached about this stuff instead of thinking about the affects of punishing UNC or Kentucky (for example) on the cash register.... a lot of this inequity babble would never have existed.

There are really three groups of people who are for professionalization of college sports:

Those who are hypothetically for free markets everywhere and don't care about the collateral damage;
Those who are jealous of the money made by the institutions and want to "get them;" and
Pro sports fans who don't understand anything about college sports.

In other words, y'all are all ignorant sluts.04-cheers
You're forgetting #4, people that stand to benefit financially from burning the system to the ground. To those of you that think something new can be built on top of this, no, it won't. It'll be just like any other state of anarchy, whoever the big bad warlord is will come riding in and fill the power vacuum through sheer force of will, then grow entrenched after securing enough clout. This is going to be a feeding frenzy for corporate America and the sport won't even resemble professional athletics anymore. After all, what you see in the NFL, where you go where you're drafted won't apply. Nike will grab a hold of you at 16 and you WILL go to a Nike school or be in violation of a contract, or even the law.

The people in favor of this are the easily-influenced who abandon all sense of nuance when they find out the training table isn't open on Sunday night and libertarians that worship capitalism so much they think moneychangers in the temple was a "sound business decision."
(This post was last modified: 10-07-2019 06:50 PM by Mav.)
10-07-2019 06:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Go College Sports Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 314
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 30
I Root For: NCAA
Location:
Post: #119
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 02:36 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 12:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Mike Aresco's take---

“You can’t have states basically trying to have a mishmash of laws dealing with what is a national undertaking,” Aresco told the Orlando Sentinel. “This is a national enterprise and it’s got to be governed nationally by the NCAA office.

“As far as I’m concerned, universities should have every right to maintain an amateur model, and if you don’t like it, go to the [NBA] G-League. It’s up to you, but it’s a choice you can make.”

The Fair Pay for Play Act, or SB 206, was signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law allows college athletes in the state to be paid for use of their name, image and likeness. It goes into effect in 2023.

“There is such simplistic thinking about this and what it can mean,” Aresco said. “No one is forced to go to these schools and enjoy a full scholarship and all of the other benefits that can run up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Most students would certainly love to have that opportunity.”



https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c...story.html


These two statements don't match up.......

It's ludicrous. Mike Aresco gets a multi-million dollar annual contract to...make sure that his conference stays sixth best instead of seventh best? The reality, which should have become quite clear even within the insular world in which folks like Aresco are living, is that many people outside of that world also have a vested interest in what happens at these institutions. And that vested interest on the other side is often just as strong. So that "just leave us alone" attitude, doesn't really fly.

On top of all the rest of the hypocrisy, it's rich that Aresco will not only offer his opinion, but won't heed his own advice. If California wants to put SB206 on the books, it's really none of his concern.
10-07-2019 07:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eldonabe Offline
No More Wire Hangars!
*

Posts: 9,706
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 1263
I Root For: All but Uconn
Location: Van by the River
Post: #120
RE: Am I the only one who thinks pay for play will be a train wreck?
(10-07-2019 04:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 10:36 AM)e-parade Wrote:  
(10-07-2019 10:06 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(10-03-2019 10:55 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  IMO there are two major groups who hate this idea (for now).

The Schools: They are afraid of the money - this will morph into their bill and they will have to pay everyone from the equestrian team to the football team; and they will lose school endorsement deals and the money will go straight to the kids and take them out of the equation... not to mention the NCAA chits for the major tournament appearances.


The Fans (the ones who don't like it obviously): There are really two subgroups of haters here.

- The first are the ones who think these kids are already lucky and privileged enough to get free school. To me that is just jealousy. 95% of the "school bill" doesn't even pay for education costs anymore, it is all fees and administration BS.
- The second are the sky screamers who firmly believe that corruption will take over and the T. Boon Pickens of the world (god rest his soul) will just buy everything in sight for their school

Right now, the money paid out is hidden and there is a lot of it nobody knows about (or willfully ignores - see Rick Pitino)... Put it on the table for all to see, that actually will level the playing field not distort it. Yes some school will have more aggressive buyers than others, but that is life and that is already in play behind the scenes - expose it.

The NCAA f'kd this up royally years ago when they selectively enforced rules.... I think Calapari once said while at Umass.... [to paraphrase] Kentucky got caught, University of New Orleans is in a lot of trouble for this! If they had done their job and truly practiced what they preached about this stuff instead of thinking about the affects of punishing UNC or Kentucky (for example) on the cash register.... a lot of this inequity babble would never have existed.

There are really three groups of people who are for professionalization of college sports:

Those who are hypothetically for free markets everywhere and don't care about the collateral damage;
Those who are jealous of the money made by the institutions and want to "get them;" and
Pro sports fans who don't understand anything about college sports.

In other words, y'all are all ignorant sluts.04-cheers

Or:

Those of us who don't want free markets everywhere, want people to be able to make money for things like writing a book without being punished (see the Div III golfer who was kicked out of the NCAA because he wrote a book about golfing), and also don't care if there's collateral damage to a system we already view as extremely broken.

That last bit is the key part. The system is broken right now, and quite frankly I'd be fine with it burning to the ground and starting fresh if it means it'll eventually get to a better working order.


I don't anticipate it to burn to the ground, that's only the stance of those of you who seem to think the sky will fall, and somehow boosters will be able to completely run everything as if there won't be any precautions put in place to prevent people from signing potential recruits to come to their favorite schools by offering them money before signing...or that somehow players who weren't considered good enough to earn scholarships would suddenly be deemed worthy enough to businesses to pay for their entire education. Like really, do you honestly believe a walk-on that barely sees the field would be a marketable person to that degree? If this is done right, a player would first need to turn down a scholarship offer elsewhere to come as a walk-on to a top program (not crazy, it does happen), and then have some booster or business decide to step in get them as part of a marketing campaign high profile enough to cover the costs in order to...keep them at a school they already decided to attend despite not really having a measurable impact on the team to that point?

You do realize it would be entirely possible and encouraged to have communications leading up to the actual exchange of money tracked and monitored to make sure nothing fishy is going on right? Just allowing people to be paid for their likeness doesn't instantly turn it into open season where recruiting violations no longer exist.

My comment was a satire. Most people probably missed the old SNL reference.
But the serious part-collateral damage-I'm talking about the athletes in sports other than football and basketball, the athletes who aren't stars, the academic programs that won't be getting money back (Texas gives over $10 million a year), the open takeover of programs and players by sponsors, the financial burden on schools that aren't part of the P5, ...

The NCAA is a mess. The book thing is a bureaucracy run amok. I am pretty sure he did not really violate their rules. But they make it up as they go. They penalize Penn St. for a nasty incident that involved an ex-coach and a non-student, but can't penalize UNC for making a mockery of the idea of student and athlete. And they nail Georgia Tech to the wall for an agent giving a player $300 of clothes which he reimbursed for once caught. They nail USC to the wall because they didn't control agents but didn't do anything of significance that actually gave them an advantage on the field. Montana gets a relative slap on the wrist for protecting rapists to keep them playing, but since its FCS and not highly publicized, the NCAA doesn't care that much. I'm fine if the NCAA gets burned to the ground. Its all the other things I'm concerned about.


Bullet - you ignorant slut!!!!!!!! I thought you worked for Sofa-King?
10-08-2019 07:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.