In Soviet Russia, football watches you!
4 Likes
Football and basketball players are not allowed to have part time jobs? I thought they could do so?
But to my point, the jobs are monitored by the NCAA and have to be within certain rules. Regardless of who is paying them.
I do believe title 9 will get involved because this will cause a severe difference between the paying of the men and women athletes.
And that is the point of Title 9, make sure all athletes, while at the university, are getting equal everything, which will include imo payment from ESPN, shoe companies etc if this goes through. Whether they put all the money in a big fund and then share it equally, I am not sure. But I have a hard time believing this wonât be an issue.
This has already happened in womenâs tennis, starting in soccer and will continue to be a big issue. I donât agree with this at all, but I believe this will be an issue.
They are not allowed to unionize right now. When you pay them, I do believe that will happen. That is when the âdemandsâ become much more of an issue along with agents.
I was saying they get the benefit of any money the university receives. But they are already getting unlimited food, medical, obviously living, education and a stipend for extra money.
Most university are losing a lot of money, these new laws will only make it harder for anyone not in the top 25 to compete. Which is fine, but that isnât what college sports is supposed to be about. That is what pro leagues are supposed to be about.
Just cause you are able to make a buck, doesnât mean you should or that is the point of what you are doing. Hence the non-profit status of these universities.
Title IX would get involved if the school was paying player but Title IX has no say so over money I make outside of school business.
It governs what the institute supplies to its athletes. If a school adds another sport for the boys then they must add equal scholarships for the girls. If the school allows football and basketball players to earn money for their name, image and likeness then they must allow it for girl athletes. Well for all of their athletes for that matter.
Well thinking about it, Title IX would be involved to make sure the school is not denying any athletes, especially women, the opportunity to earn money for their name, image and likeness. Brittany Griner would have made a lot of money.
I understand that currently this isnât a Title 9 issue as it isnât something they have to do deal with yet, but I do believe it will be if this goes forward.
The money will be too much for Title 9 activists to ignore imo. Just like in womenâs tennis, where they only play 3 sets, but they get the same money as the men, who play 5 sets. This will be a money issue to big to ignore I think.
I am all for people getting paid millions of dollars, but colleges are not the means for this while you are a student. I believe this is for the pro leagues. Football is the only sport where you have to wait 3 years to be paid, and that isnât the NCAAâs fault. The NFL doesnât want them!
These universities are able to get the TV deals cause the fans loves the universities. They are not showing up for a particular player. There isnât 30k worth of âso and soâ player fans coming to said game. They go to support the school. See how much the D league or womenâs basketball players get paid.
The universities are the money makers here, not the players imo. And all of that money is given back to the university, not to the star QB. I just think this will ruin college athletics if not done properly. And I donât trust it will be done properly.
1 Like
NOT being able to make money off your own name goes against everything America.
1 Like
The solution is to not force kids to play in college if all they want to do is play professionally. If they have an option to play professionally out of high school and still elect to go to college then there is no basis for the argument that universities should be paying college athletes.
2 Likes
But the schools are not going to pay players. Athletes will earn money outside of school for their name, image and likeness as it is a part time job like most college students have. They will sell autograph pictures and let companies use their name.
A lot of college students have non-athletic scholarships and they have part time jobs.
The difference is the athlete is more popular therefore he will gain more money for his name, image and likeness or whatever the market says his value is.
Market Value! Getting what youâre worth. Now thatâs American.
This is a no brainer. For example, itâs nuts that a school like A&M was able to feast financially off of Manzielâs success but there was never a fair opportunity for him to do the same until after his brand took a hit.
Is Manziel really a good example to be cited here?
Well . . .
Pick anyone who brought a high level of attention to their school then, schools/NCAA still rake in money and the player still canât get any of their own until well after the fact for some. It just doesnât make any sense.
What money did he bring into the school ? The ags are going to show up regardless whose on the field. The TV contracts and revenue sharing are still the same.
I would argue that being the first year in the SEC was a much bigger draw than Johnny football !!
2 Likes
What happens to College FB when XFL or new leagues coming out accept players right after HS. Those leagues will act like youth academy with pay and grooming for NFL.
Will CFB lose top players the 1% making NFL?
All the media attention that came with the Heisman trophy that has his name on it? Dude got a suspension for signing some autographs while the school is out there prospering off promoting his accomplishments?
Iâll go back to my original point since weâre still hung up on the example I used. It doesnât matter the player, Baker Mayfield, Lamar Jackson, Ed Oliver, a second string WR on Texas State for all I care⊠if they have the opportunity to profit off their name/accomplishments they should be able to. Itâs just silly that they canât.
CFB would probably lose those that really do not want to go to school or those that want to start earning money to help their families.
I think most 5 stars will go to college because they know there is a bigger payday in 3 or 4 years in the draft.
This only works if you organize. Do it one at a time school by school.
Start with USC, Michigan, Ohio
ncaa
They will never allow players from profiting from their own image while in School.
Why?
It is as simple as having the ncaa controlling the piggy bank. Their non profit status is a joke. Just check their salaries. I am all for them making money but donât you find it highly hypocritical that they are fighting so much on this issue?
The boosters pay for college football especially in the P5 programs.
Do you remember when Cam Newton went to AuburnâŠallegedly his family was paid $300k. Do you remember how quickly this was swept under the rug? Just saying.
There is a way to make this work with players being paid by sponsors at a salary cap level.
Could this affect recruiting? It has happened long ago already. Do you really believe 5 stars players choose a School for their Architecture, law school or business programs? I would wager a bet that very few do. I am not trying to be cynical but the ncaa is the definition of being cynical.
California is already setting the stage for a Supreme Court ruling but it wonât be California vs NCAA. It will be a class action suit of athlete1, athlete2, athlete3 and athlete4 vs NCAA claiming the NCAA denied them their civil rights by making them ineligible for college athletics.
Come to think of it, California could sue the NCAA if the NCAA makes one of their schools vacate games won because they played a ineligible athlete that followed a previous ruling of the Supreme Court.
Yes this could get messy for the NCAA so I hope they come up with a good solution before they look like the bad guys again.
hey!!! that was definitely lip synced