Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
Author Message
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,295
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 808
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #41
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
(06-22-2022 09:07 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(06-18-2022 10:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Or, you can just have each conference establish its own rules and enforcement. If your conference sets rules no other conference is willing to live with they can just stop playing your schools. That moderating influence should quickly result in a manageable number of conferences and schools with common interests.

Except... the Supreme Court said that this is an illegal trust.


The only reason conferences used to set eligibility rules for student-athletes (such as not paying salaries) is so that schools would compete on even ground. But the Supreme Court said that schools can not coordinate on any rules that involve compensation.

Going forward, individual schools can choose to stop playing other individual schools. But conferences can't choose to stop playing other conferences based on NIL money or any form of compensation, because it would violate anti-trust law.


It's possible that the Supreme Court didn't realize this was implied in their ruling. But I doubt it.

SCOTUS said no such thing. They did suggest the NCAA couldn't do it, but not schools within a conference that they voluntarily belong to. They may have a problem if a conference were to set a salary cap without a collective bargaining agreement, but I doubt they would object to a salary minimum. That's the kind of rule I was talking about, and which the marketplace would regulate whether that number is too high.
(This post was last modified: 06-22-2022 09:59 AM by ken d.)
06-22-2022 09:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,116
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 938
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #42
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
(06-22-2022 05:26 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Don't want to start another thread on this. Kliavkoff gives some clues on what he wants for the PAC's next contract:

Quote:What’s happening with Pac-12 media rights?

“We’ve begun the process of engagement in our next media rights deal,” he said. “Every single decision is viewed through the filter of what this would do to the value of media rights long term.”

Does the recent Apple TV deal with Major League Soccer mean Apple is a potential partner now?

”All of the direct to consumer services — Apple being one of the dozens — are potential bidders,” he said. “It’s more likely than not that our Tier 1 rights, the biggest of our football games, will continue to be distributed on linear television. The balance of our rights, the content that often sits on the Pac-12 Network, is likely to be distributed on a combination of linear and digital players.”

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-ge...year?sd=pf

I've said something to this effect before, but as an outside observer, I really appreciate just how open and transparent George Kliavkoff is compared to any conference commissioner that I've seen up to this point.

He doesn't muddle up his statements with a lot of academic or fuzzy gobbly-gook. When the CFP expansion was voted down, while the ACC and Big Ten went on about student-athlete welfare and needing more time to evaluate (among other things, Kliavkoff was straight-forward and said that the Pac-12 didn't understand how the revenue was going to be split and, as a result, couldn't vote for it. No BS there.

Even compared to other commissioners that I found to be pretty direct, such as Jim Delany with the Big Ten previously and Greg Sankey with the SEC now, they still engaged in a lot of posturing in their public statements, such as often taking hardline stances or even threats which realistically weren't going to end up being the final outcome. (See the separate SEC playoff concept thrown out there recently or the way Delany leveraged the Rose Bowl in negotiating what the Big Ten wanted in both the BCS and CFP systems.) I see very little posturing from Kliavkoff, which is refreshing. As I've said before, I hope that hanging around university presidents too much doesn't beat that out of him.
06-22-2022 09:54 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 8,578
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 606
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #43
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
(06-22-2022 09:40 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(06-22-2022 09:07 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(06-18-2022 10:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Or, you can just have each conference establish its own rules and enforcement. If your conference sets rules no other conference is willing to live with they can just stop playing your schools. That moderating influence should quickly result in a manageable number of conferences and schools with common interests.

Except... the Supreme Court said that this is an illegal trust.


The only reason conferences used to set eligibility rules for student-athletes (such as not paying salaries) is so that schools would compete on even ground. But the Supreme Court said that schools can not coordinate on any rules that involve compensation.

Going forward, individual schools can choose to stop playing other individual schools. But conferences can't choose to stop playing other conferences based on NIL money or any form of compensation, because it would violate anti-trust law.


It's possible that the Supreme Court didn't realize this was implied in their ruling. But I doubt it.

SCOTUS said no such thing. They did suggest the NCAA couldn't do it, but not schools within a conference that they voluntarily belong to. They may have a problem if a conference were to set a salary cap without a collective bargaining agreement, but I doubt they would object to a salary minimum. That's the kind of rule I was talking about, and which the marketplace would regulate whether that number is too high.

Salary minimums (or NIL minimums) are not a problem. But I don't think anyone is talking about conferences setting salary minimums.


A conference setting a salary cap is the same thing as Delta and United colluding to set a salary cap. Sure, there's other airlines, but it's still illegal. The same law applies if Ohio State and Michigan and Penn State collude (through the conference) to set a salary cap. Or collude to do anything that might lower salaries.

Taking it one step further... if schools collude to boycott schools with fewer salary restrictions, that is illegal.


That was the big problem I had with the Supreme Court ruling. There is no analogy for this in business, because sports require an opposing team. Businesses don't require opponents.

I see nothing wrong with universities choosing to only play opponents that have player eligibility rules similar to their own. I see nothing wrong with universities voluntarily joining an organization (such as a conference or the NCAA or the Alabama High School Athletic Association) that sets uniform rules for player eligibility. The Supreme Court disagrees with me, though.


To take it one small step further: The Federal Trade Commission's Antitrust Guidance for Human Resources Professionals states, "Agreements among employers not to recruit certain employees or not to compete on terms of compensation are illegal." Can Delta and United collude to exclude pilots who have flown for more than thirty years (or four years) to make room for cheaper talent? Can Delta and United collude to exclude pilots who take legal stimulant drugs that increase performance but may have long-term negative health consequences? Can Delta and United agree to refrain from poaching each other's employees during the month before the national championship game? The answer to all of these is "no," and the implications for college and high school sports are obvious.
06-22-2022 11:50 AM
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: #44
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
(06-22-2022 11:50 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(06-22-2022 09:40 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(06-22-2022 09:07 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(06-18-2022 10:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Or, you can just have each conference establish its own rules and enforcement. If your conference sets rules no other conference is willing to live with they can just stop playing your schools. That moderating influence should quickly result in a manageable number of conferences and schools with common interests.

Except... the Supreme Court said that this is an illegal trust.


The only reason conferences used to set eligibility rules for student-athletes (such as not paying salaries) is so that schools would compete on even ground. But the Supreme Court said that schools can not coordinate on any rules that involve compensation.

Going forward, individual schools can choose to stop playing other individual schools. But conferences can't choose to stop playing other conferences based on NIL money or any form of compensation, because it would violate anti-trust law.


It's possible that the Supreme Court didn't realize this was implied in their ruling. But I doubt it.

SCOTUS said no such thing. They did suggest the NCAA couldn't do it, but not schools within a conference that they voluntarily belong to. They may have a problem if a conference were to set a salary cap without a collective bargaining agreement, but I doubt they would object to a salary minimum. That's the kind of rule I was talking about, and which the marketplace would regulate whether that number is too high.

Salary minimums (or NIL minimums) are not a problem. But I don't think anyone is talking about conferences setting salary minimums.


A conference setting a salary cap is the same thing as Delta and United colluding to set a salary cap. Sure, there's other airlines, but it's still illegal. The same law applies if Ohio State and Michigan and Penn State collude (through the conference) to set a salary cap. Or collude to do anything that might lower salaries.

Taking it one step further... if schools collude to boycott schools with fewer salary restrictions, that is illegal.


That was the big problem I had with the Supreme Court ruling. There is no analogy for this in business, because sports require an opposing team. Businesses don't require opponents.

I see nothing wrong with universities choosing to only play opponents that have player eligibility rules similar to their own. I see nothing wrong with universities voluntarily joining an organization (such as a conference or the NCAA or the Alabama High School Athletic Association) that sets uniform rules for player eligibility. The Supreme Court disagrees with me, though.


To take it one small step further: The Federal Trade Commission's Antitrust Guidance for Human Resources Professionals states, "Agreements among employers not to recruit certain employees or not to compete on terms of compensation are illegal." Can Delta and United collude to exclude pilots who have flown for more than thirty years (or four years) to make room for cheaper talent? Can Delta and United collude to exclude pilots who take legal stimulant drugs that increase performance but may have long-term negative health consequences? Can Delta and United agree to refrain from poaching each other's employees during the month before the national championship game? The answer to all of these is "no," and the implications for college and high school sports are obvious.

There's a "maybe" here. As the NCAA currently exists, its rules restricting athlete movement and compensation effectively restrict all college athletes because there is no realistic "free market" alternative.

Maybe if there were 50 or 100 (or more) top-level college programs that have no restrictions on athlete compensation, the courts would not prevent other college athletic programs at a recognized lower level of competition from having a "salary cap" for athletes, whether that cap number is zero or something higher than zero -- especially if there were no formal rules other than, "Only teams with zero or very low compensation for their athletes can compete in our 'national championships'."

Maybe.
06-22-2022 12:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chester Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 558
Joined: Feb 2018
Reputation: 64
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
Sports Business Journal reports the FBS AD association, LEAD1, has formed a working group to look into FBS football self-governance. Thirty-six ADs have volunteered.
06-22-2022 07:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalJuan Offline
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 5,800
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 310
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeach
Post: #46
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
(06-18-2022 06:44 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I think we’re going to see the P5 pull out of college football which will probably mean that the G5 get merged into FCS (unless the NCAA wants to continue with a 2 tier system and let some of the stronger FCS leagues move into the G5 tier).

That would be a death sentence. Without the NCAA element, teams would simply be semi-pro, and we've seen a few of those leagues come and go. The universities are what married up the fans with the sport. Similar to how people in various cities become fans of their local NFL team as a form of civic pride, schools are the same.

Nobody cares about some semi-pro team in Tuscaloosa.
06-22-2022 07:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,431
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 234
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
(06-19-2022 12:48 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  
(06-19-2022 12:31 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  
(06-19-2022 12:10 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  
(06-19-2022 12:04 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  
(06-19-2022 11:31 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  Who I think makes the cut (revised list):
SEC
B1G
Pac-12
ACC
Big 12
Big East
Atlantic 10
Mountain West
WCC
American

There would be 130 basketball schools (assuming Hawaii joins the MW for all sports) and 98 football schools.
They could keep the 64-team March Madness format and even bluff their way into staying in the NCAA and continuing to be called Division 1 while every other team moves down a division.
Each conference could have three auto bids in the tourney and then there would be 34 at-large spots left for the six major leagues to add to.

The conferences would likely all have at least 20-22 game schedules.

Football would have a 12-team playoff. Army and Navy would get a waiver to play Division 1 football with the rest of the sports in Division 2, and the current FCS football programs in basketball leagues (Big East, A-10, WCC) would play Division 2 football if they so choose.

Division 1 revenue sports (m/w basketball, football) would be pay for play.

What's being discussed is a breakaway of the 10 FBS conferences, meaning, those conferences that fund and play 85-scholarship football. As I'm sure you know, the Big East, A10 and WCC don't play 85-scholarship football. The 10 conferences that do are listed below:

SEC
Big Ten
ACC
Big 12
Pac 12
MWC
MAC
AAC
SBC
C-USA

On no planet will the MAC, SBC, and C-USA be Division 1 while the Big East, A-10, and Gonzaga be Division 2.

Again, forget about Olympic sports, including basketball, this is all about the schools that fund/play 85-scholarship football. Adam Rittenhouse of ESPN reported on this over a month ago.

https://mobile.twitter.com/finebaum/stat...LNv64qAAAA

That's a guess, not reporting. The big conferences want basketball under their umbrella as well and leaving out the Big East, Gonzaga, and A-10 leaves money on the table. They won't be doing that.

Yes they will. They are tired of these schools in those three conferences having voting power around football. I could see some Big Sky, WAC, ASUN, CAA, Southland, OVC and most of the MVFC schools will join this group. MVC and CAA schools are not happy with the non-football schools for inviting football members.
06-22-2022 08:39 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hootyhoo Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 250
Joined: Aug 2021
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Kennesaw State
Location: ATL
Post: #48
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
(06-22-2022 07:55 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(06-18-2022 06:44 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I think we’re going to see the P5 pull out of college football which will probably mean that the G5 get merged into FCS (unless the NCAA wants to continue with a 2 tier system and let some of the stronger FCS leagues move into the G5 tier).

That would be a death sentence. Without the NCAA element, teams would simply be semi-pro, and we've seen a few of those leagues come and go. The universities are what married up the fans with the sport. Similar to how people in various cities become fans of their local NFL team as a form of civic pride, schools are the same.

Nobody cares about some semi-pro team in Tuscaloosa.

Nobody cares about a semi pro team in Tuscaloosa. But people will care about the Alabama crimson tide even if they are a semi pro team. We know that because they're basically semi pro now, and people and wild about them. The biggest cfb brands will be fine no matter how things go.
06-22-2022 10:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,295
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 808
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #49
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
(06-22-2022 10:01 PM)Hootyhoo Wrote:  
(06-22-2022 07:55 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(06-18-2022 06:44 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I think we’re going to see the P5 pull out of college football which will probably mean that the G5 get merged into FCS (unless the NCAA wants to continue with a 2 tier system and let some of the stronger FCS leagues move into the G5 tier).

That would be a death sentence. Without the NCAA element, teams would simply be semi-pro, and we've seen a few of those leagues come and go. The universities are what married up the fans with the sport. Similar to how people in various cities become fans of their local NFL team as a form of civic pride, schools are the same.

Nobody cares about some semi-pro team in Tuscaloosa.

Nobody cares about a semi pro team in Tuscaloosa. But people will care about the Alabama crimson tide even if they are a semi pro team. We know that because they're basically semi pro now, and people and wild about them. The biggest cfb brands will be fine no matter how things go.


That's right. And it's true all across the country, because college football has been semi pro for decades and it has thrived. The only thing that would be different is that the players would be paid better than they have been in the past.
06-23-2022 10:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jimrtex Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 960
Joined: Aug 2021
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Houston, Tulsa, Colorado
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff: NCAA shouldn't govern college football
(06-22-2022 10:01 PM)Hootyhoo Wrote:  
(06-22-2022 07:55 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(06-18-2022 06:44 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I think we’re going to see the P5 pull out of college football which will probably mean that the G5 get merged into FCS (unless the NCAA wants to continue with a 2 tier system and let some of the stronger FCS leagues move into the G5 tier).

That would be a death sentence. Without the NCAA element, teams would simply be semi-pro, and we've seen a few of those leagues come and go. The universities are what married up the fans with the sport. Similar to how people in various cities become fans of their local NFL team as a form of civic pride, schools are the same.

Nobody cares about some semi-pro team in Tuscaloosa.

Nobody cares about a semi pro team in Tuscaloosa. But people will care about the Alabama crimson tide even if they are a semi pro team. We know that because they're basically semi pro now, and people and wild about them. The biggest cfb brands will be fine no matter how things go.
Why couldn't there be an organization of football clubs for U23 professional players. If some of the clubs wish to be associated with universities and pay some of their compensation in scholarships, fine. If others want to be associated with communities and provide internships or other employment that would be fine too.
06-23-2022 10:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2022 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, © 2002-2022 MyBB Group.