Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
O'Bannon suit, if NCAA loses, 50% of TV revenue to players?
Author Message
CommuterBob Offline
Head Tailgater
*

Posts: 5,840
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 173
I Root For: UCF, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #21
RE: O'Bannon suit, if NCAA loses, 50% of TV revenue to players?
(04-02-2013 12:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 11:53 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 11:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It could very easily be the death of women's sports, Title IX not withstanding. It will all come down to who brings in the bucks, and who doesn't. Women's sports are a drain on almost all athletic departments budgets. Title IX won't stand if this case goes in O'Bannion's favor. With very few exceptions, the women's programs won't be worth keeping, and forcing universities to do so will be an unnecessary drain on capital. I can't see them enforcing Title IX under such circumstances. Only the profitable programs for each school will remain, and only a very few women's programs make any money...
Title IX lawsuits ran rampant through college athletics in the early '90's. There are enough rabid feminists out there that each school (through the NCAA) ensures that there is a proportionate balance. Title IX is a Federal issue and won't go anywhere, no matter what happens to the NCAA. Unless the athletic departments are going to sever their ties with their school and lose their tax-exempt status and establish themselves as for-profit agencies, then Title IX will remain.
If the athletes that generate these huge sums of money get a piece of it, I seriously doubt the federal government can continue to force schools to put forth an equal amount of sports for women, when they don't generate any income. Once it becomes all about the money, equality will fly out the window. Bet on it...

If this goes through, only the profitable programs will remain, and very few women's programs generate any income to speak of. Only a very few do, and they won't for long without anyone to compete against...

I don't disagree with you at all about those who generate revenue should remain, but that's not how the Feds see it. That was the same unsuccessful argument used back in the '90's. The lawsuits prevailed because it's about opportunity not only for scholarships, but participation in sports - whether there are enough girls that want to participate or not. That's why sports like women's rowing has taken off in college athletics. It's a sport that really doesn't require much in the way of previous experience to be a participant and is a way to get women additional spots and scholarships.
04-02-2013 12:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NJRedMan Offline
Tasted It

Posts: 8,017
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 241
I Root For: St. Johns
Location: Where the Brooklyn @
Post: #22
RE: O'Bannon suit, if NCAA loses, 50% of TV revenue to players?
(04-02-2013 12:54 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 12:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 11:53 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 11:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It could very easily be the death of women's sports, Title IX not withstanding. It will all come down to who brings in the bucks, and who doesn't. Women's sports are a drain on almost all athletic departments budgets. Title IX won't stand if this case goes in O'Bannion's favor. With very few exceptions, the women's programs won't be worth keeping, and forcing universities to do so will be an unnecessary drain on capital. I can't see them enforcing Title IX under such circumstances. Only the profitable programs for each school will remain, and only a very few women's programs make any money...
Title IX lawsuits ran rampant through college athletics in the early '90's. There are enough rabid feminists out there that each school (through the NCAA) ensures that there is a proportionate balance. Title IX is a Federal issue and won't go anywhere, no matter what happens to the NCAA. Unless the athletic departments are going to sever their ties with their school and lose their tax-exempt status and establish themselves as for-profit agencies, then Title IX will remain.
If the athletes that generate these huge sums of money get a piece of it, I seriously doubt the federal government can continue to force schools to put forth an equal amount of sports for women, when they don't generate any income. Once it becomes all about the money, equality will fly out the window. Bet on it...

If this goes through, only the profitable programs will remain, and very few women's programs generate any income to speak of. Only a very few do, and they won't for long without anyone to compete against...

I don't disagree with you at all about those who generate revenue should remain, but that's not how the Feds see it. That was the same unsuccessful argument used back in the '90's. The lawsuits prevailed because it's about opportunity not only for scholarships, but participation in sports - whether there are enough girls that want to participate or not. That's why sports like women's rowing has taken off in college athletics. It's a sport that really doesn't require much in the way of previous experience to be a participant and is a way to get women additional spots and scholarships.

Yeah but if the other mens sports are dropping then a lot of womens will too.
04-02-2013 12:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CommuterBob Offline
Head Tailgater
*

Posts: 5,840
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 173
I Root For: UCF, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #23
RE: O'Bannon suit, if NCAA loses, 50% of TV revenue to players?
(04-02-2013 12:59 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 12:54 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 12:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 11:53 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 11:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It could very easily be the death of women's sports, Title IX not withstanding. It will all come down to who brings in the bucks, and who doesn't. Women's sports are a drain on almost all athletic departments budgets. Title IX won't stand if this case goes in O'Bannion's favor. With very few exceptions, the women's programs won't be worth keeping, and forcing universities to do so will be an unnecessary drain on capital. I can't see them enforcing Title IX under such circumstances. Only the profitable programs for each school will remain, and only a very few women's programs make any money...
Title IX lawsuits ran rampant through college athletics in the early '90's. There are enough rabid feminists out there that each school (through the NCAA) ensures that there is a proportionate balance. Title IX is a Federal issue and won't go anywhere, no matter what happens to the NCAA. Unless the athletic departments are going to sever their ties with their school and lose their tax-exempt status and establish themselves as for-profit agencies, then Title IX will remain.
If the athletes that generate these huge sums of money get a piece of it, I seriously doubt the federal government can continue to force schools to put forth an equal amount of sports for women, when they don't generate any income. Once it becomes all about the money, equality will fly out the window. Bet on it...

If this goes through, only the profitable programs will remain, and very few women's programs generate any income to speak of. Only a very few do, and they won't for long without anyone to compete against...

I don't disagree with you at all about those who generate revenue should remain, but that's not how the Feds see it. That was the same unsuccessful argument used back in the '90's. The lawsuits prevailed because it's about opportunity not only for scholarships, but participation in sports - whether there are enough girls that want to participate or not. That's why sports like women's rowing has taken off in college athletics. It's a sport that really doesn't require much in the way of previous experience to be a participant and is a way to get women additional spots and scholarships.

Yeah but if the other mens sports are dropping then a lot of womens will too.

No doubt, but football has no female equivalent, so schools have to make that up somewhere else. No matter what the NCAA does in terms of setting minimum numbers of sports, even if a school only has football and basketball, they will have women's basketball and a proportional number of women's sports to offset football.
04-02-2013 02:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chess Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,815
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 219
I Root For: ECU & Nebraska
Location: Chicago Metro
Post: #24
RE: O'Bannon suit, if NCAA loses, 50% of TV revenue to players?
My answer concerning men's college football and basketball (i.e. revenue sports), is to use the military pay charts in addition to the student's school tuition, health insurance, and housing.

So,

Freshman - $17,892/year
Sophomore - $20,056
Junior - $21,089 - $23,774 depending on academic credits completed toward a degree.
Senior - $23,360 - $27,198 depending on academic credits completed toward a degree.
5th Year Senior - $25,481 - $29,851 depending on academic credits completed toward a degree.

I think the salary part should be taxable. Also, and assuming you have 100 5th year senior athletes (which is unlikely- 85 football players and 15 basketball players), the budget for salaries is $3,000,000/year. (Is that less than Nick Saban's yearly salary?)

I also think the athlete should be able to sign contracts with the school determining whether they will get a 4 year guaranteed scholarship or a one year renewable contract. For example, Georgia is willing to give me a one year renewable scholarship but East Carolina will guarantee me a four year guaranteed scholarship. Assuming I remain academically eligible, which school is best for me?

http://www.airforce.com/benefits/enlisted-pay/
(This post was last modified: 04-02-2013 02:59 PM by chess.)
04-02-2013 02:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UHCougar Offline
Big East Special Forces
*

Posts: 1,872
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 161
I Root For: Houston
Location: 8th Circle of Hell
Post: #25
RE: O'Bannon suit, if NCAA loses, 50% of TV revenue to players?
(04-02-2013 11:53 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 11:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It could very easily be the death of women's sports, Title IX not withstanding. It will all come down to who brings in the bucks, and who doesn't. Women's sports are a drain on almost all athletic departments budgets. Title IX won't stand if this case goes in O'Bannion's favor. With very few exceptions, the women's programs won't be worth keeping, and forcing universities to do so will be an unnecessary drain on capital. I can't see them enforcing Title IX under such circumstances. Only the profitable programs for each school will remain, and only a very few women's programs make any money...

Title IX lawsuits ran rampant through college athletics in the early '90's. There are enough rabid feminists out there that each school (through the NCAA) ensures that there is a proportionate balance. Title IX is a Federal issue and won't go anywhere, no matter what happens to the NCAA. Unless the athletic departments are going to sever their ties with their school and lose their tax-exempt status and establish themselves as for-profit agencies, then Title IX will remain.

Feminists are not the driving force behind Title IX. . . parents of daughters who are athletes are the driving force behind Title IX . . . and only the parents of sons can't seem to understand this.
04-02-2013 03:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #26
RE: O'Bannon suit, if NCAA loses, 50% of TV revenue to players?
The government won't be able to force a school to lose money on athletics. I don't care what the law says. It will be repealed, or schools will drop athletics before they're forced to lose money...

Any time any government has tried to force businesses to struggle to make money with ignorant laws, the business has either shut down, or moved to where they're able to make a profit. Since the schools can't move...
(This post was last modified: 04-02-2013 03:44 PM by bitcruncher.)
04-02-2013 03:43 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UHCougar Offline
Big East Special Forces
*

Posts: 1,872
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 161
I Root For: Houston
Location: 8th Circle of Hell
Post: #27
RE: O'Bannon suit, if NCAA loses, 50% of TV revenue to players?
(04-02-2013 11:25 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 11:20 AM)UHCougar Wrote:  Why can't the NCAA just condition an athletic scholarship on: (1) an athlete not accepting payment for athletic performance, including the use of the athletes likeness in video games, advertisements, jersey/t-shirt sales, etc; and (2) require each athlete as a condition of signing a NLI to sign over all college athletic income to the university during the period of the NLI? At the professional level, teams implement similar clauses to secure marketing rights, etc., and in the corporate world, this is done regularly (ie., patents, etc.).

They already do. That's the point of the lawsuit. SA's sign over all their rights just to get a scholarship. The lawsuit started out as Ed O'Bannon suing EA Sports for using his likeness in an NCAA-licensed video game. Now it's ballooned to include TV revenue.

It was a rhetorical question . . . I haven't seen any of the articles clearly explain why the NLI is an adhesion contract . . . it doesn't seem to meet the test in Texas anyway.
04-02-2013 03:43 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: #28
RE: O'Bannon suit, if NCAA loses, 50% of TV revenue to players?
Won't the schools without football be better off?
04-02-2013 04:46 PM
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.