1-9 sounds like the nfl. Why do we need another nfl? I don’t even watch the one we have
1 Like
So you give a kid a scholarship for his Physic ability. At the same time industries and organizations give him enormous grants to work on some science project. He has everything paid for and a fellowship from a company that is paying him until he graduates. He also owns the rights to the patents that he creates while working. He is a 5 star physics recruit. He will graduate and be swallowed up by some firm that paid him as an undergraduate.
Not all the physics students are able to get this.
It’s more than coaches and administrators getting rich. You also have ESPN, shoe companies, construction/architects/engineers, video game companies, broadcasters, etc. making a killing.
In the end, I don’t know what the answer is. I just don’t think the current system is a fair one. Reasonable minds can disagree on it.
2 Likes
Schools are not going to pay athletes. The athletes will get money for their images an agency is going to pay for. I’m sure the NCAA will have a list of approved ways an athlete can sell usage of his name, image and likeness.
There will not be a Title IX issue because the schools are not paying athletes. The former basketball player from Baylor, Brittany Griner would have made a lot of money.
The NCAA is not going to let it be the wild wild west where an athlete can get money any kind of way. An agency or company that wants to use an athlete’s name or picture would probably have to fill out a form to the school for approval.
I think that is two different issues with regards to ESPN. ESPN, shoe companies etc are for profit organizations that should be making money as that is what they are there to do. College athletics is a non-profit tax free organization. Two different things and shouldn’t be compared imo.
Also if the athletes start to get paid, how does that affect the tax exempt status of the universities for athletics. Most schools don’t make a profit now, imagine having to pay taxes on top of that.
You may want a more fair system, but imo that is why they haven’t been paid yet, because there isn’t one that is fair to everyone such as the soccer players, tennis players, women, men, high and low revenue schools etc.
And getting an education at these schools imo is plenty fair to me. All of the sports except football have the option to go somewhere to get paid. And for football, that isn’t an NCAA rule so can’t blame them for that.
It’s true that there are a lot of people who make money off of college sports and it’s sort of unfair that the athletes don’t get a big cut of it, but with the exception of Saban and coaches with big salaries (and maybe someone like Finebaum or Herbstreit, I don’t know exactly what they make), there’s not really that many big piles of “college athletics” profit sitting in one easily identifiable place that doesn’t also have offsetting expenses you can just easily redirect to athletes.
The other thing that gets lost in a lot of the animus against the NCAA and amateur status nature of the athletes is that the amateur fiction and affiliation with the schools is a big part of the appeal of college sports. If/when you start to really strip that away I’m not sure the same interest stays since the actual product is so inferior to the professional leagues in terms of skill level and ability.
The schools don’t have to directly pay the athletes for the issues I listed above to happen.
For sure there will be agents now reaching out to the players to recruit them to the shoe companies for certain schools etc. That is already happening, and will be much much worse if it is allowed in the open.
And I don’t think Title 9 will let this go without a fight. Meaning, if a football player makes a million dollars from a shoe company but no women tennis players get any of that money, how is that any different than saying football players should get paid because it makes all the revenue for the school and tennis doesn’t.
BOTH sports use the university to market themselves, so both should benefit the same financially. Regardless of who pays them. That would be the argument from Title 9 imo.
And then what will happen if a player transfers, do the contracts all have to renegotiated from all of the teams. So now the tennis player doesn’t make as much cause said QB, who isn’t any good, decides to transfer. Or the shoe company changes the terms cause he cant get off the bench.
Just a lot of drama!
All of these already exist. You can keep your head buried in the sand, but the black market of college sports already includes all this. Right now there is no way to regulate anything and only causes a bigger divide between the elite schools and everybody else. The transfer portal is a free agency portal. Agents are sending money to players across all of D1. Shoe companies are already paying players and picking their schools.
But the biggest problem is that the players don’t even get the majority of the money. The money is flowing everywhere! Saying no body is getting rich off college sports is just ignorance (no offense, you may just not know the whole picture). So many people from scammers to legitimate businesses like Nike are making tons and tons of money.
What I actually hope one day happens is a strike by players of a major NCAA event. Not because of money, they should say its because they don’t want to miss classes for it. Would they get punished? I thought its all about the education so why should they miss a big test for a meaningless game?
I don’t think the NCAA is going to approve any of those things you mention. I think you may be going a little overboard with this and to the extreme.
This is only my guess of what the NCAA will allow.
- Selling autograph pictures
- Name can be used on media and on commercials
- Likeness can be used on Madden’s NCAA 2020
- Allowing any athlete in all sports to make money from their name, image and likeness
- Limit how much can be earned
- Company seeking name, likeness or image of an athlete must register purpose with the school
- The NCAA could require a certain percentage go into a interest bearing account for the athlete or require that certain percentage go to an athletic department fund
- Athletes will have to pay taxes on the money they earn
- Maybe the NFL/NBA etc. will disallow athletes participation for 2 years for violating NCAA rules.
There are a lot of ways you can do it that will be acceptable by the majority.
1 Like
Non-profits are allowed to have employees and will no be affected. The players, however, would find themselves in the hands of the kind and understanding IRS. As an employee they will have to pay income tax on the value of their scholarship including tuition, books, supplies, stipend, food, clothing, housing, ect.
2 Likes
I think it’s all linked. Not sure what non profit has to do with it but we can agree to disagree here.
I mostly agree with all of that. Again, I don’t know how to solve the problem. I just think the current system sucks.
Yes, they exist but at a very small black market scale compared to what will happen. It will open Pandora’s box imo. And that is what I don’t like.
I believe it will be 100 times worse and more complicated when you actually have to legislate these things.
And the schools are trying to make as much money as they can off of ESPN etc, to which the players get the benefit from it (and yet still operate at a loss). So in other words, you may say ESPN makes a lot of money, but if they didn’t, then the schools wouldn’t get the money they get to fund the new training facility that the players get to use, or the nice equipment that the players get to wear each week etc.
They, the school / ESPN etc, help each other, it isn’t flowing only one way.
To the public it may look this way.
As for all the facilities upgrades and such, yeah some of the top schools have too much money to even know what to do with it. You can only have so many hot tub game rooms. They have to get creative to spend it all. That is why they don’t mind paying $20 million on some coach buyouts. Meanwhile players can get ruled ineligible for wanting to start a clothing company to make a couple thousand dollars.
So let me get this straight. You would be against something like Ron1102 said about set income that can be made for specific things like autograph signings (set number allowed, set price) or getting paid for their likeness to be used on a video game (EA Sports already had an equal scale for all players)? Why are you against that?
I don’t think I am exaggerating at all. When you start to involve money for players, you will open the P Box of hell imo. All of the things I mention happened in paying leagues. And this would be no different, except you are dealing with teenagers mostly.
For instance, you will have players who don’t want a limit of how much they earn. Then what will they do, form a union (which has already been tried before). This will lead to a whole new box of issues like strikes. They, media members, even talked about doing a strike during the Final Four last year.
When you start to pay the players beyond the point of just going to school, that is when you start to become a professional league. The NCAA has enough problems trying to deal with their issues now, much less trying to manage a professional league full of players trying to get paid legally now.
But beyond all of this, doing this type of thing will only help a select few athletes but cause a much bigger mess / issues than it is worth. And you are going to cut the throat of UH athletics and most of the other 100 D1 schools.
But the schools are not going to pay players.
Yes, I would be against those things. What if a player doesn’t want to do an autograph signing at a pregame function because he now believes he should be paid for it.
Or how does the women’s tennis player going to get paid for her portion of the title 9 (yes I believe that will be an issue) money.
Or how much does said football player allowed to work. Will it now have to involve hold outs cause the school won’t let the player make over a certain amount or work so many hours.
I could go on and on with potential issues with diva players or possible unions.
When you involve money, you cant just set rules and expect everyone to just be all happy about it. You will create a whole host of new issues and problems that professional leagues have to deal with. Issues that are not being dealt with now, but will be.
Not sure why this matters. The NCAA still monitors the players off season jobs now. This would be no different.
I don’t think this is Title IX because the school is not paying athletes. It’s the same as letting athletes have part time jobs which football and basketball players cannot do but a tennis player can.
1 Like
How is the weather over there in Soviet Russia?
I thought before the argument is they are already getting paid by everything they get which has a huge monetary value (direct and indirect)? Now you don’t want them to get any payment because they might ask for more? They are already getting paid!! And once again, I don’t see what EA Sports giving a kid $250 to be on a video game has to do with the NCAA paying players.