quote:

Originally posted by GJG:

quote:

Originally posted by OKCGene:
I’ve been saying for several years:

College Football is now Semi-Pro. There’s just too much money involved.

I've felt for years that colleges should drop the pretense about it not being a for profit enterprise, with everyone involved making fortunes out of it - except the athletes who make it possible.

Absolutely.

While everyone involved - coaches, athletic directors, trainers, hot dog vendors, beer sellers, program sellers, T-Shirt makers, TV stations, TV networks, ad agencies, NCAA administrators, ....... rolls in cash directly related to their efforts, what do these 'student-athletes' get?

1) a scholarship with some living expenses paid for, which most of them use to take classes selected by the coaching staff specifically for easy grades and scholastic demands that can be bent around travel/practice/workout/film demands. See 'xyz studies', 'exercise physiology', 'sports business,....),

2) a schedule that makes serious study almost impossible, except possibly in the summer/off season,

3) training and a pedigree that a minute fraction might be able to take advantage of and go pro, and

4) a damn good chance of serious and/or permanent injury.

Can anyone name another modern for-profit industry that pays zero wages for their labor?

Well, to be fair, the colleges are out of pocket for food/housing expenses. So, I'll expand that so that if anyone can suggest another industry that gets by with feeding and housing instead of paying wages for 100% of its labor, I'll accept that.

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:

Because the schools with big time boosters/alumni would pay huge endorsement deals and smaller schools or schools without big dollar alumni would never be able to compete. It would be like the NFL, but with no salary cap - the richest owners would dominate the league because all of the best players would go where they could make the most money.

Suddenly, I'm really glad Tim Cook is an Auburn fan!

quote:

Originally posted by joel9507:
Can anyone name another modern for-profit industry that pays zero wages for their labor?

Well, to be fair, the colleges are out of pocket for food/housing expenses. So, I'll expand that so that if anyone can suggest another industry that gets by with feeding and housing instead of paying wages for 100% of its labor, I'll accept that.

It's an interesting observation, but not really relevant.

The athletes are receiving consideration for their participation.

It's also not unusual, in that the Census Bureau reports that 3/4 of the businesses in the US do not have paid employees.
https://www.census.gov/library...-paid-employees.html

I have never seen or heard anyone address the Title IX issue if colleges were going to start paying football players. Title IX demands that all athletes be treated equally across all sports. Are proponents of pay saying that Title IX can be ignored or do they think in their wildest dreams that they would allow an exception for the males only sport of football (LOL)?

People see these large numbers for revenue from football, but if you do the math and take out expenses only the top schools would be able to pay more than a pittance and stay afloat.

If serious, address the Title IX issue and do the math and say exactly how the pay structure would work.

If you are saying allow endorsement deals across the board, address how schools in small markets or with poor alumni would compete with a school in Los Angeles or New York, or are you proposing to just completely blow up college sports and just do semi-pro leagues in large population areas?

quote:

Originally posted by r0gue:
Maybe someday my kid can get a lucrative endorsement for his role in college football marching band.

I recall when the debate over college athletes and their amateur status came up, JALLEN mentioned that he was allowed to play paid band gigs while he was a member of his university's band.

quote:

Because the schools with big time boosters/alumni would pay huge endorsement deals and smaller schools or schools without big dollar alumni would never be able to compete. It would be like the NFL, but with no salary cap - the richest owners would dominate the league because all of the best players would go where they could make the most money.

In the D1 basketball there are 18,000 total participants in the NCAA in any given year. Of that each year 4,181 are draft eligible for the NBA who offer 60 Draft slots per year, and for last year 52 players were drafted. Overseas players fill the remaining slots.

52 out of 18,000, that's what we're talking about. Paying 52 players, because the rest don't have a snowballs chance in hell of making it to the pros and thus no chance of making money locally.

Link

Who was the best player on the #8 team in the NCAA in 2016, without google nobody knows who it was, if he went pro or not.

Now who was the best player in the NCAA last year, anyone? anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Even those here that don't follow D1 basketball heard of Zion. Who else do you know of...

This eliminates the problems for the companies like Nike and it's rogue agents paying parents to get their kid to go to a Nike university. Basically it legalized the current under table graft process into upfront payments.

Its all about owning and controlling player income rights before that player makes it big in the draft.

Now that it will be legal for Nike and others to control what players get paid and where they go they control championships, what team will be loaded and who won't, coaching, environment, history, Cinderella ability all are gone.

Maybe I'm a bit cynical, but these same people were the pariahs of amateur college athletics under FBI investigation, and now we're saying, change the rules so the money boys are not illegally influencing the game..

So when we do the math, only a small number of openings exist to make money in basketball.

All this for 52 people.... and their agents, Nike, Reebok, and meglabillionaire alumnus like Phil Knight who runs and owns much of Nike. Expect to see Oregon win the national championship for the next 15 years in football and maybe basketball.. As long as Nike and Phil Knight run it...

What we had wasn't perfect, but I'm sure if CA is for it, then it's bad for sports...

A) This is about them getting endorsement deals. No other student has to refrain from marketing their likeness, etc to attend a school. This is a free-market/free-speech win.

B) Yup, it will kill the NCAA in its current fashion, and good riddance. At the bare minimum, they should have offered lifetime medical to the players. Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. They have been going whole-hog for awhile.

C) It, hopefully, will finally get a minor league team system going for the NFL, which would let College go back to student athletes.

Entire thread...TL;DR.

From what I gather, this thread has addressed only the "team" sports; football, basketball, et.al. But what about the individual sports like Tennis or Golf?? Collegiate Tennis players achieve their national ranking through the NCAA ranking system, so I can't imagine what this would do to those poor schlubs if they weren't allowed to compete in NCAA-sanctioned events and thus increase their national ranking. I guess get ranked in the ATP/WTA system?

I know Stanford has put out some REALLY good tennis players in past history. One of the greatest to play the game...John McEnroe.

quote:

Originally posted by pawprintsdoc:
the best healthcare money can buy

MAYBE, and that's a big MAYBE for future NFL players.

Everyone else is grist for the mill. They are kicked out, and, until fairly recently, had their scholarship pulled, once injured.

The disgusting thing about College Football, is that its "moneyball" for everyone, but the kids. So they are given a bunch of rah-rah BS, and then fed to people with no commitment or loyalty to them.

Almost (RC Slokum might have been the last), no college football coaches are educators. Frankly, neither are most HS football coaches.

These kids get paid plenty. Boosters take care of them. I remember seeing the big sports names on campus driving new cars, wearing the most current cool clothing, flashing plenty of cash and generally not giving a damn about anything but themselves. I don't ever recall seeing them in any campus cafeterias or in any classes though...

^^^^^
Reminds me of the movie, "One on One". GREAT flick!!

Y'all know me...always have a story...

My brother worked with a guy (Wayne) in the late 70's that had graduated from Louisiana Tech. So it was Wayne's first day as a Freshman and in one of his classes, the professor was taking roll-call. The Prof called out "Terry Bradshaw" and Wayne sneakily turned around to see who this "superstar" was, since Bradshaw was touted as some kind of QB god (which is was). Next class, Bradshaw didn't answer roll, and by the 5th class, the Prof didn't even call out Bradshaw's name. Back then, grades were posted "publicly", so there was no hiding from it by SSN or some other code. Wayne looked at the roster of grades at the end of the semester and Bradshaw had gotten a "B" in the course. Never showed up, but don't know if was tutored on the side and took exams "in private". Who knows...

Buddy of mine tutored Ray Childress at A&M. Yeah...those guys are EXTREMELY coddled to the Nth degree. Fortunately, Ray is one of the VERY few that didn't let that crap go to his head. He's done some good things in private life.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
A) This is about them getting endorsement deals. No other student has to refrain from marketing their likeness, etc to attend a school. This is a free-market/free-speech win.

B) Yup, it will kill the NCAA in its current fashion, and good riddance. At the bare minimum, they should have offered lifetime medical to the players. Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. They have been going whole-hog for awhile.

C) It, hopefully, will finally get a minor league team system going for the NFL, which would let College go back to student athletes.

1000% right on.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
A) This is about them getting endorsement deals. No other student has to refrain from marketing their likeness, etc to attend a school. This is a free-market/free-speech win.

B) Yup, it will kill the NCAA in its current fashion, and good riddance. At the bare minimum, they should have offered lifetime medical to the players. Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. They have been going whole-hog for awhile.

C) It, hopefully, will finally get a minor league team system going for the NFL, which would let College go back to student athletes.

1000% right on.

I don't think for a second that the money, TV contracts and fans would follow the athletes to a minor league system. It would be like the XFL or any of the other myriad minor league football experiments.

The money would stay with the colleges where the rabid fans are and where people willingly spend their money and time. No die hard college fan is going to suddenly give up that affiliation and start cheering for the generic minor league football team in their area.

When the money and the TV contracts stay with the colleges, you are in the same boat you are in now. The allegiance is not to the players, it's to the school and that is where the money will be.

^^^^^^^^ I think it would be like Major League Baseball with farm teams. AA, AAA teams.

For example, the LA Dodgers have the OKC Dodgers.

There's just wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too much money involved.

quote:

Originally posted by OKCGene:
^^^^^^^^ I think it would be like Major League Baseball with farm teams. AA, AAA teams.

For example, the LA Dodgers have the OKC Dodgers.

There's just wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too much money involved.

What would the fan base be for such a set up? Who would pay to go and watch?

People have generations long affiliations with universities and teams and that is what drives the popularity. The money will stay where the eyeballs and butts in seats are.

Good. The NCAA is a corrupt cartel and its rules allow it and its members to fill their coffers on the backs of athletes. The schools can sell jerseys with Player X's number on the back and keep all the money but if Player X signs a football for $20 he's in hot water. That's bullshit. Lets quit pretending the "amateurism" horse didn't leave the barn and burn it the fuck down decades ago.

Yes, the athletes in mens fb and bb get full rides that only recently might actually cover their full cost of attendance. It's a one year grant in aid. The coach can pull it. It ain't no four or five year promise. The kids get steered towards program friendly classes and majors. Their education is about what's convenient for the program and the coach who makes seven figures a year and can walk away from the kid or the program with zero penalty.

The NCAA can adapt or go away. And they'll adapt because the money is too big.

The luckiest people in the world have been NFL owners because they haven't had to pay to identify or develop players between high school and college. The NCAA schools do it for them at little cost for the NFL.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
A) This is about them getting endorsement deals. No other student has to refrain from marketing their likeness, etc to attend a school. This is a free-market/free-speech win.

B) Yup, it will kill the NCAA in its current fashion, and good riddance. At the bare minimum, they should have offered lifetime medical to the players. Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. They have been going whole-hog for awhile.

C) It, hopefully, will finally get a minor league team system going for the NFL, which would let College go back to student athletes.

1000% right on.

And the elephant in the room has been identified. Let's be real shall we. The vast majority of college football players have no business whatsoever being in college. Most are functionally illiterate due to the current public school / college system. They're just shoved along taking up space in classes to remain eligible to play until they can...
1 - Enter the NFL draft
2 - Get injured and be discarded.
3 - Commit a crime substantial enough for them to be discarded.

Pull all these mental midgets out of the college system, and force the NFL to start a farm system like baseball where these individuals can play for pay, at least for a while. Oh, and colleges will have to find a new golden goose to fund their lavish facilities and payrolls.

quote:

Originally posted by berto:
The luckiest people in the world have been NFL owners because they haven't had to pay to identify or develop players between high school and college. The NCAA schools do it for them at little cost for the NFL.

Boom!

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:

quote:

Originally posted by joel9507:
Can anyone name another modern for-profit industry that pays zero wages for their labor?

Well, to be fair, the colleges are out of pocket for food/housing expenses. So, I'll expand that so that if anyone can suggest another industry that gets by with feeding and housing instead of paying wages for 100% of its labor, I'll accept that.

It's an interesting observation, but not really relevant.

I'll take that as "no, I can't think of one either"

Can I root for both of them to lose?

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
It's an interesting observation, but not really relevant.

quote:

I'll take that as "no, I can't think of one either"

You skipped the rest of my answer - do you really want me to list the 75% of American businesses that have no paid employees? Not to mention the thousands of top college students who compete every year for coveted unpaid internships at some of the most profitable companies in the world.

I mean, I totally understand the people who despise football and athletics in general cheering this and hoping for college football to go away - I just don’t understand the ones who say they like college football but want the players to be paid. That’s a fine position but I’ve never seen a single one of them address any of the issues I’ve outlined in my posts. I’m truly curious how somebody thinks it could possibly work without addressing the very real issues that would have to be faced.