Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
Author Message
SoCalBobcat78 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,861
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 302
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #101
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-12-2019 06:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-12-2019 04:04 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  
(09-12-2019 03:50 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Oh, I see. People that want to maximize their earnings on the free market or, in practical reality, simply want to earn some pocket change for college, are "spoiled brats".

Yes, some of them are sort of like brats. No one is forcing them to take a scholarship.

The NCAA rules about making money exist so you don't have athletes selling abstract crayon drawings to wealthy boosters for $5000 or working $100 an hour as an elevator operator in a one-story building. If you don't like that, don't take an athletic scholarship. It's really not that much different than people working on graduate assistantships agreeing to not have any other work.

I do sympathize that elite high school and college athletes don't have any way to make money until they're old enough for the draft but that is not the responsibility of the NCAA to create a minor league for a tiny percentage of student athletes. Anyone who doesn't like that, take it up with the NBA and NFL or for any other minor leagues that won't take guys right out of high school.

As I noted in my real life personal example, not all athletes receive scholarships (and in fact none of them receive athletic scholarships at the Division III level), yet they’re still subject to same compensation restrictions simply for being a student-athlete.

Regardless, we can go around in circles all day on this, but the people on this forum objecting to this California law and similar proposed laws are really and truly a tiny minority of society. There’s a ton of bipartisan political will behind this effort (unlike the direct payment of players by universities, which got intertwined with the more volatile involvement of labor unions). The NCAA needs to adjust or die - there’s no putting the proverbial genie back in the bottle at this point.

I agree. It is interesting that SB206 passed unanimously in the California Assembly 73-0 and unanimously in the California Senate at 39-0. It does not get any more bipartisan than that. It is not a good sign for the NCAA when Democrats and Republicans are united against the NCAA.

This is going to end up in court and the NCAA knows it. The NCAA has not had a lot of luck with anti-trust lawsuits in the past. They need to catch up with the times, because they are going to lose badly on this. Mark Emmert sending a threatening letter to the Governor of California is a sign that he is very worried. This is not Vermont. California has the size and the resources to take on this battle with the NCAA. Other states will follow and Congress may eventually get involved. This is not going to end well for the NCAA. The NCAA needs to change.
09-13-2019 10:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #102
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-13-2019 08:36 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  I think a lot of folks here are underestimating the NCAA.

......

Get out the popcorn because this thing is far from over.

I agree. Some talk about "the NCAA" as if it is some alien entity forced on the schools. But it's not, it's a creation of the schools, particularly as you say the big powerful ones.

Like you, I do not think the NCAA is likely to just meekly accept the California rule as the new national mandate, like GM and Ford have done with emissions standards. There are powerful forces on both sides, so as you say, a fight is likely, and a big one.
09-13-2019 10:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Schadenfreude Offline
Professional Tractor Puller
*

Posts: 9,634
Joined: Jun 2003
Reputation: 238
I Root For: Bowling Green
Location: Colorado

CrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #103
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-13-2019 10:01 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The NCAA can fight tooth and nail on this in the courts, but when TV networks and corporate sponsors start dropping you, that's when even the most stubborn organizations change.

A lack of college football content from California hardly seems an existential threat to ABC, ESPN, and the other networks.

Somewhat separately: I wonder what fans of Fresno State, San Diego State, and San Jose State are thinking. I can't imagine this would great for them. Is the next Trent Dilfer really going to sign a letter of intent with Fresno State when a UCLA recruiter is telling him how bigger his profile would be if he played in Los Angeles? This really could create an even more uneven playing field.
09-13-2019 10:21 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: #104
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-13-2019 10:01 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-13-2019 08:46 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(09-12-2019 06:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-12-2019 04:04 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  
(09-12-2019 03:50 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Oh, I see. People that want to maximize their earnings on the free market or, in practical reality, simply want to earn some pocket change for college, are "spoiled brats".

Yes, some of them are sort of like brats. No one is forcing them to take a scholarship.

The NCAA rules about making money exist so you don't have athletes selling abstract crayon drawings to wealthy boosters for $5000 or working $100 an hour as an elevator operator in a one-story building. If you don't like that, don't take an athletic scholarship. It's really not that much different than people working on graduate assistantships agreeing to not have any other work.

I do sympathize that elite high school and college athletes don't have any way to make money until they're old enough for the draft but that is not the responsibility of the NCAA to create a minor league for a tiny percentage of student athletes. Anyone who doesn't like that, take it up with the NBA and NFL or for any other minor leagues that won't take guys right out of high school.

As I noted in my real life personal example, not all athletes receive scholarships (and in fact none of them receive athletic scholarships at the Division III level), yet they’re still subject to same compensation restrictions simply for being a student-athlete.

Regardless, we can go around in circles all day on this, but the people on this forum objecting to this California law and similar proposed laws are really and truly a tiny minority of society. There’s a ton of bipartisan political will behind this effort (unlike the direct payment of players by universities, which got intertwined with the more volatile involvement of labor unions). The NCAA needs to adjust or die - there’s no putting the proverbial genie back in the bottle at this point.

I think this is different simply because we have already seen numerous cheating scandals that indicate that alumni and boosters don’t operate in the same economic system as the Olympic model exists. The reality is this is an open avenue to pay players any amount for most anything under the guise of “name and likeness”. It’s worth noting that abuse of this system would look almost exactly the same as what was happening in the 1980’s at SMU. That SMU conduct resulted in the only death penalty ever levied against a D1 school. Seems fairly unlikely the NCAA will just opt to go along with an Olympic model that can be so easily abused—especially since the NCAA just achieved a hard won court victory that actually says their amateur model, with minor modifications, is legal and reasonable.

California can do what they like and the NCAA can’t prevent them from doing so. However, unlike the Oklahoma vs NCAA case, the NCAA has already prevailed in court defending the reasoning of the amateur model against the pay model. Given the NCAA’s recent court win, I don’t think the California schools are going to be able to blatantly break NCAA rules on pay for play and still compete for national championships. 04-cheers

That court ruling was dealing with the employee vs. amateur status of student-athletes while playing their sport, though. This is very different - we're talking about individuals being able to capitalize on their likenesses with other enterprises that aren't under NCAA control. It's a totally different realm.

The main argument that I keep seeing against this law is essentially that boosters will abuse it. That is absolutely a valid concern. However, as I've stated earlier, that concern does not prevail over the personal and economic liberty of individual students under the law. The NCAA has a valid interest in ensuring with compliance with the Olympic model, but that shouldn't (and this California law is stating that it doesn't) mean an outright prohibition.

I REALLY think too many people are missing the winds of change here. There are too many old school college sports fans here that aren't looking at the big picture. This is NOT a California issue. This is becoming a bipartisan national issue and it's coming down the pike everywhere.

Maybe even more importantly that I haven't really discussed up to this point, the third parties have a lot of money wrapped up with the NCAA, particularly the TV networks and corporate sponsors, are absolutely 100% *not* going to be fine with shutting out all of the schools from the largest and wealthiest state in the country for a single second. It doesn't make sense economically and they're going to get a *ton* of political and public pressure to suspend their ties with the NCAA if the NCAA is dumb enough to actually carry through with not allowing California schools compete in their championships. The NCAA can fight tooth and nail on this in the courts, but when TV networks and corporate sponsors start dropping you, that's when even the most stubborn organizations change.

The NCAA needs to adjust or die. This issue isn't getting reversed when other states and the federal government itself wants the same thing. California is just the start.

That may be true. But the vast majority of those folks your referring to were the same folks adamantly fighting against paying players. They are the same people that are very unhappy with whats happening in the transfer market. What do think the transfer market will look like when you add essentially a veiled version of pay for play---with third parties picking up the tab? Its going to be wild west free agency. Worse yet---the boosters will be running it---not the schools.

My point is that no organization is slower to evolve than the powers that run college football. After fighting something very similar in court---and winning a decision that largely supports the current amateur model---I dont see the NCAA throwing in the towel. Keep in mind---the Big 10 and Notre Dame---both entities that are far more important to college sports than any California school---have strongly opposed anything other than the current amateur model.

Knowing the way college sports changes very slowly---I dont see the NCAA just giving in. At the very least---expect a court battle---which I suspect the NCAA will probably win. That said----I do agree that public pressure to give more to the players will continue to grow. I think the answer is more likely to be found in some sort of revenue sharing deal that runs through the NCAA that would compensate the players evenly across the board (similar to the IE Sports deal). That would keep the playing field relatively level (lol...ok, not level, but largely unchanged) and keep control of the process contained within the sport---rather than unleashing a wild west compensation free agency driven by boosters and alums who are accountable to nobody.
(This post was last modified: 09-13-2019 10:31 AM by Attackcoog.)
09-13-2019 10:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,722
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1775
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #105
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-13-2019 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(09-13-2019 10:01 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-13-2019 08:46 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(09-12-2019 06:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(09-12-2019 04:04 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Yes, some of them are sort of like brats. No one is forcing them to take a scholarship.

The NCAA rules about making money exist so you don't have athletes selling abstract crayon drawings to wealthy boosters for $5000 or working $100 an hour as an elevator operator in a one-story building. If you don't like that, don't take an athletic scholarship. It's really not that much different than people working on graduate assistantships agreeing to not have any other work.

I do sympathize that elite high school and college athletes don't have any way to make money until they're old enough for the draft but that is not the responsibility of the NCAA to create a minor league for a tiny percentage of student athletes. Anyone who doesn't like that, take it up with the NBA and NFL or for any other minor leagues that won't take guys right out of high school.

As I noted in my real life personal example, not all athletes receive scholarships (and in fact none of them receive athletic scholarships at the Division III level), yet they’re still subject to same compensation restrictions simply for being a student-athlete.

Regardless, we can go around in circles all day on this, but the people on this forum objecting to this California law and similar proposed laws are really and truly a tiny minority of society. There’s a ton of bipartisan political will behind this effort (unlike the direct payment of players by universities, which got intertwined with the more volatile involvement of labor unions). The NCAA needs to adjust or die - there’s no putting the proverbial genie back in the bottle at this point.

I think this is different simply because we have already seen numerous cheating scandals that indicate that alumni and boosters don’t operate in the same economic system as the Olympic model exists. The reality is this is an open avenue to pay players any amount for most anything under the guise of “name and likeness”. It’s worth noting that abuse of this system would look almost exactly the same as what was happening in the 1980’s at SMU. That SMU conduct resulted in the only death penalty ever levied against a D1 school. Seems fairly unlikely the NCAA will just opt to go along with an Olympic model that can be so easily abused—especially since the NCAA just achieved a hard won court victory that actually says their amateur model, with minor modifications, is legal and reasonable.

California can do what they like and the NCAA can’t prevent them from doing so. However, unlike the Oklahoma vs NCAA case, the NCAA has already prevailed in court defending the reasoning of the amateur model against the pay model. Given the NCAA’s recent court win, I don’t think the California schools are going to be able to blatantly break NCAA rules on pay for play and still compete for national championships. 04-cheers

That court ruling was dealing with the employee vs. amateur status of student-athletes while playing their sport, though. This is very different - we're talking about individuals being able to capitalize on their likenesses with other enterprises that aren't under NCAA control. It's a totally different realm.

The main argument that I keep seeing against this law is essentially that boosters will abuse it. That is absolutely a valid concern. However, as I've stated earlier, that concern does not prevail over the personal and economic liberty of individual students under the law. The NCAA has a valid interest in ensuring with compliance with the Olympic model, but that shouldn't (and this California law is stating that it doesn't) mean an outright prohibition.

I REALLY think too many people are missing the winds of change here. There are too many old school college sports fans here that aren't looking at the big picture. This is NOT a California issue. This is becoming a bipartisan national issue and it's coming down the pike everywhere.

Maybe even more importantly that I haven't really discussed up to this point, the third parties have a lot of money wrapped up with the NCAA, particularly the TV networks and corporate sponsors, are absolutely 100% *not* going to be fine with shutting out all of the schools from the largest and wealthiest state in the country for a single second. It doesn't make sense economically and they're going to get a *ton* of political and public pressure to suspend their ties with the NCAA if the NCAA is dumb enough to actually carry through with not allowing California schools compete in their championships. The NCAA can fight tooth and nail on this in the courts, but when TV networks and corporate sponsors start dropping you, that's when even the most stubborn organizations change.

The NCAA needs to adjust or die. This issue isn't getting reversed when other states and the federal government itself wants the same thing. California is just the start.

That may be true. But the vast majority of those folks your referring to were the same folks adamantly fighting against playing players. They are the same people that are very unhappy with whats happening in the transfer market. What do think the transfer market will look like when you add what will essentially be a veiled version of pay for play---with third parties picking up the tab? Its going to be free agency. Worse yet---the boosters will be running it---not the schools.

My point is that no organization is slower to evolve than the powers that run college football. After fighting something very similar in court---and winning a decision that largely supports the current amateur model---I dont see the NCAA throwing in the towel. Keep in mind---the Big 10 and Notre Dame---both entities that are far more important to college sports than any California school---have strongly opposed anything other than the current amateur model.

Knowing the way college sports changes very slowly---I dont see the NCAA just giving in. At the very least---expect a court battle---which I suspect the NCAA will probably win. That said----I do agree that public pressure to give more to the players will continue to grow. I think the answer is more likely to be found in some sort of revenue sharing deal that runs through NCAA that would compensate the players evenly across the board (similar to the IE Sports deal). That would keep the playing field level and keep control of the process contained within the sport---rather than unleashing a wild west compensation free agency driven by boosters and alums who accountable to nobody.

Oh, I know that the NCAA is going to fight. They'll fight this to the bitter end (even though I believe that they'd be better off if they actually tried to involve themselves in the discussion as opposed to putting its head in the sand). I'm just saying that this is distinct from the player compensation issue in the past because the NCAA isn't no longer fighting a group of players that want to unionize, but rather the State of California and potentially the federal government and other states.

Also, the third parties certainly haven't fought against players getting compensated (whether directly or indirectly). NCAA core sponsors Google, Intel and Uber hire scores and scores of interns from California universities every year. They know full well the cognitive dissonance that a computer science student on a scholarship at Stanford is actively encouraged to take as many high paying internships as he/she can find, yet an athlete on scholarship at Stanford is restricted from all of that. Heck, much of Silicon Valley was pretty much built on college students specifically that wanted to make a lot of money. The TV networks just want an entertaining product - whether players get paid is irrelevant. All of those third parties might might have been neutral on player compensation up to this point, but if/when the NCAA fighting player compensation starts negatively impacting the bottom line and public perception of those third parties, then they'll start throwing their weight around.
09-13-2019 10:56 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,861
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 302
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #106
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-13-2019 10:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(09-13-2019 08:36 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  I think a lot of folks here are underestimating the NCAA.

......

Get out the popcorn because this thing is far from over.

I agree. Some talk about "the NCAA" as if it is some alien entity forced on the schools. But it's not, it's a creation of the schools, particularly as you say the big powerful ones.

Like you, I do not think the NCAA is likely to just meekly accept the California rule as the new national mandate, like GM and Ford have done with emissions standards. There are powerful forces on both sides, so as you say, a fight is likely, and a big one.

You could see this coming. Ed O'Bannon's landmark case in 2014 is the foundation for the California bill. In that case, the court found that the NCAA bylaws operated as an unreasonable restraint of trade, in violation of antitrust law. This is the lingering effects of O'Bannon case playing itself out. The O'Bannon case will be used as a favorable precedent for other legal challenges to NCAA amateurism rules. The NCAA will likely fight this, but if the politicians are bailing on them and the courts are not ruling in their favor, they are fighting a losing battle.
09-13-2019 11:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DogTracks Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,837
Joined: Jul 2002
Reputation: 7
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #107
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
I believe Tennessee, Washington, South Carolina and Colorado all have similar bills introduced now. This thing passed unanimously in California- completely non-controversial. There's a wave coming. At this point, it's on the NCAA to make its rules work around this.
09-13-2019 11:39 AM
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: #108
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
The schools themselves voted these rules for the NCAA. Politicians do not know how to run athletic departments, so they should butt out. The only time they should butt in for anti-trust case is to get schools like Boise State, UCF and others into a P5 conference. Other than that, let the NCAA handle the rules and all that how they fit. College sports is not the pros. This bill will turn so many fans off from football and all that. We already saw how the shoe scandal that rocked the NCAAs. This bill gives it a green light for boasters and players do illegal stuff.
09-13-2019 11:46 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DexterDevil Offline
DCTID
*

Posts: 5,008
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 218
I Root For: EMU, DCFC
Location: Jackson, Mi
Post: #109
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-13-2019 11:46 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  The schools themselves voted these rules for the NCAA. Politicians do not know how to run athletic departments, so they should butt out. The only time they should butt in for anti-trust case is to get schools like Boise State, UCF and others into a P5 conference. Other than that, let the NCAA handle the rules and all that how they fit. College sports is not the pros. This bill will turn so many fans off from football and all that. We already saw how the shoe scandal that rocked the NCAAs. This bill gives it a green light for boasters and players do illegal stuff.
You poor football fans.

Sent from my SM-J737P using Tapatalk
09-13-2019 01:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fresno St. Alum Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,408
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 306
I Root For: Fresno St.
Location: CA
Post: #110
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
State of South Carolina is looking into paying college players. Soon we will hear Alabama, Texas etc...
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-type-bill
(This post was last modified: 09-13-2019 02:09 PM by Fresno St. Alum.)
09-13-2019 02:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Ohio Poly Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,369
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Ohio Poly
Location:
Post: #111
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
Watershed moment. Players being recruited now to enroll next fall would be able to make money as redshirt juniors and seniors. California schools have that recruiting advantage for the time being.
(This post was last modified: 09-14-2019 06:38 AM by Ohio Poly.)
09-13-2019 07:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Chappy Offline
Resident Goonie
*

Posts: 18,888
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 899
I Root For: ECU
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #112
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-13-2019 02:02 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  State of South Carolina is looking into paying college players. Soon we will hear Alabama, Texas etc...
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-type-bill

I like the California Bill. Any other college student can make money off their name and likeness. Why not the athletes?

This South Carolina proposal, I do not like so much. Nobody forces kids to play college sports so I don't see a need for the schools to set up trust funds for the athletes.
09-14-2019 07:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,732
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 1434
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location:
Post: #113
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
Democrats and Republicans are the country’s two most dysfunctional entities. Thus, the NCAA will prevail.
09-14-2019 11:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Ohio Poly Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,369
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Ohio Poly
Location:
Post: #114
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-14-2019 11:16 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Democrats and Republicans are the country’s two most dysfunctional entities. Thus, the NCAA will prevail.

https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/201...vin-newsom

When the NCAA loses this war, perhaps they should try starting a new political party.
09-15-2019 08:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Ohio Poly Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,369
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Ohio Poly
Location:
Post: #115
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-12-2019 06:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  As I noted in my real life personal example, not all athletes receive scholarships (and in fact none of them receive athletic scholarships at the Division III level), yet they’re still subject to same compensation restrictions simply for being a student-athlete.

Regardless, we can go around in circles all day on this, but the people on this forum objecting to this California law and similar proposed laws are really and truly a tiny minority of society. There’s a ton of bipartisan political will behind this effort (unlike the direct payment of players by universities, which got intertwined with the more volatile involvement of labor unions). The NCAA needs to adjust or die - there’s no putting the proverbial genie back in the bottle at this point.

There's no bipartisanship when it comes to Trump and Moscow Mitch. Don't underestimate their will to keep the golden egg in the hands of the rich and powerful few, especially if it's California that's the one busting the monopoly. And here comes the WSJ to defend the NCAA:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/californias...1568577090
(This post was last modified: 09-15-2019 04:27 PM by Ohio Poly.)
09-15-2019 08:51 AM
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: #116
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
The thing is, these laws are turning college sports into a pro-sports. Some of these law makers are thinking of passing laws for high school athletes as well. One way to battle California on this issue is withhold any money for research, Pell Grants and all that to starve the universities until the lawmakers reverse and kill this stupid bill.
09-15-2019 11:10 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,718
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 446
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #117
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-13-2019 10:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The TV networks just want an entertaining product - whether players get paid is irrelevant.

This is where I think you're either overlooking or disregarding a fundamental point. I agree that the TV networks just want an entertaining product, but I also believe the TV networks are smart enough to understand that further eroding competitive balance in college athletics by eliminating the amateurism rules will detrimentally affect the perceived entertainment value of their product. That will hit them in the wallet and therefore they have a stake in the NCAA preserving the status quo.

I acknowledge that many if not most college sports viewers only want to see "the best play the best" and don't care if the best become the best by having a large enough and rich enough fan base to buy the best players. They view that as the natural order of things and would be happy to see all of the amateurism rules dumped in favor of unhindered market economics. But there are two sizable chunks of the viewing audience who tune in because those rules preserve at least a semblance of a level playing field.

One chunk is fans of non-P5 schools who know their teams are at an economic disadvantage but pay to watch anyhow because they know that disadvantage isn't big enough to prevent their teams from competing at the highest level and sometimes winning. I keep spending good money year after year on cable, streaming and PPV fees because on some days -- not most days but some days -- Hawaii can beat an Arizona or Oregon State in football. On some days, non-P5 amateur student-athletes are talented enough and play together well enough to beat their P5 amateur student-athlete counterparts.

Of course the other chunk is casual fans who aren't deeply invested in a particular team but enjoy watching David occasionally take down Goliath. They're the ones boosting the ratings and hence the advertising value of games between Boise State or UCF and the P5 powers. They're the ones ESPN is targeting when it still shows clips of the Bronco's 2007 Fiesta Bowl victory over Oklahoma when hyping an upcoming G5 versus P5 showdown.

So I can't imagine that the TV networks have no trepidation about the emergence of an unhindered booster-driven cash market in college athletes. If it further concentrates competitive strength in a few dozen elite programs and leads to a more pronounced stratification or even a split within Division I then the result will be a devaluation of much of their inventory. Nobody stays tuned into blowouts and most folks won't pay for the opportunity to watch an expected blowout. And nobody will pay a premium to watch games between schools that have been officially relegated to a lower tier.

That's just two cents from my corner of the peanut gallery.
09-15-2019 03:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #118
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-15-2019 03:08 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-13-2019 10:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The TV networks just want an entertaining product - whether players get paid is irrelevant.

This is where I think you're either overlooking or disregarding a fundamental point. I agree that the TV networks just want an entertaining product, but I also believe the TV networks are smart enough to understand that further eroding competitive balance in college athletics by eliminating the amateurism rules will detrimentally affect the perceived entertainment value of their product.


The TV networks don't intervene in MLB to force the Yankees' payroll down to the level of the Royals' payroll. They don't intervene in the NBA to force the best free agents to sign with teams in Indianapolis or Memphis instead of NY or LA. And TV has infinitely more money invested in those pro leagues than in non-P5 college football. So it seems like a stretch to think the TV guys would intervene to preserve shamateurism in college sports.
09-15-2019 03:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,718
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 446
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #119
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
(09-15-2019 03:45 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(09-15-2019 03:08 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  
(09-13-2019 10:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The TV networks just want an entertaining product - whether players get paid is irrelevant.

This is where I think you're either overlooking or disregarding a fundamental point. I agree that the TV networks just want an entertaining product, but I also believe the TV networks are smart enough to understand that further eroding competitive balance in college athletics by eliminating the amateurism rules will detrimentally affect the perceived entertainment value of their product.


The TV networks don't intervene in MLB to force the Yankees' payroll down to the level of the Royals' payroll. They don't intervene in the NBA to force the best free agents to sign with teams in Indianapolis or Memphis instead of NY or LA. And TV has infinitely more money invested in those pro leagues than in non-P5 college football. So it seems like a stretch to think the TV guys would intervene to preserve shamateurism in college sports.

I’m not saying they will. I’m questioning Frank the Tank’s envisioned scenario of them intervening on the other side, against the NCAA:

‘All of those third parties might might have been neutral on player compensation up to this point, but if/when the NCAA fighting player compensation starts negatively impacting the bottom line and public perception of those third parties, then they'll start throwing their weight around.”
09-15-2019 05:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Renandpat Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,140
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Central State
Location:
Post: #120
RE: California challenging NCAA's amateurism rules
NY State Senate now has SB6722 in it's Rules Committee.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/s6722
09-17-2019 05:23 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.