I didn’t read anything about players becoming employees of the university. Did you read something else that said that?
People are forgetting what the mission of a university is,
3 Likes
This article references the Dennis Dodds article on CBSS. In the Dodds article is a statement about attendance dropping because of “concern of length of games and lack of appeal to millennials”
This statement does not cover all the reasons for lack of attendance. The time and date of games in Sept. greatly effect attendance. The millennials can stay at home and watch it on TV or I-pad. These talking heads also never mention the majority of students being women of whom many are studying rather than attending a FB game.
Regardless of who pays taxes or how it effects the individual schools/conferences. Those who are and will pay, THE ADVERTISERS, for players who will be in the eventual “super conferences” are getting just what they have wanted. The most eyeballs watching an elite college brands (whether elite or not, t-shirt fans will do and believe as told) in 4 conferences, complete with an already established play-off.
These advertisers and the media probably already have algorithms developed that will provide something like the number of fans watching, minus the number of fans lost to TV/Media. G5’s will still have FB but it will be true second tier with a play-off like the FCS teams. I would expect the advertisers paying way less for ads on G5 games than they are paying now. G5’s will be on streaming, Netflix, Facebook, etc.
Dobbs can down play decreases in attendance but it is the future, so the emphasis will be placed on paying the best players to play in the new super four college developmental league.
yes. When the suit was first filed there was an article about the unintended consequences of players receiving pay for playing. The article pointed out that at the moment schools started paying players for playing that they would either be employees or contractors. If they are employees then the schools will have to pay 1/2 their social security and depending on the contract insurance. If they are independent contractors the player will have to pay 100% of their social security and arrange their own insurance.
When this came out, Northwestern commented on it. Yes, everything is taxable, including scholarships. They are all income, real and imputed, and therefore taxable. They stated they would become employees of the school. If they wanted to, NU could make the players(employees) pay for their uniforms and deduct it on their taxes.
Have you seen the current model? Coaches make a ton, get buyouts when they don’t produce. Coaches quit and leave kids hung out to dry and those kids are punished with having to sit a year. TV networks, bowls and administrators make all the money and the players are the ones who physically take the toll.
College basketball might be worse if that’s possible.
I believe most P5 athletic departments are self sustaining meaning the athletic department does not get money from the school. What it spends, it brings in. No one should have a problem with that. I’m sure it would be optional for the school to give its athletes more stipend.
Don’t have time to delve into it but a USA article on Athletic Programs says only 23 of the athletic programs were “self sufficient”- taking in more money from TV, ticket sales, etc than they spent. I’ll try to link.
Review Shows 23 Public Athletic Programs Meet NCAA Mark For Self-Sufficiency In FY '16
Sports Business Daily
A review of college athletics’ financial information showed that 23 public school athletics programs finished their FY '16 having “met the NCAA’s benchmark for financial self-sufficiency,” according to a front-page piece by Berkowitz & Schnaars of USA TODAY. A program is “deemed self-sufficient if the operating revenue it generates through its activities, including ticket sales, donations, TV rights and other income shared by conferences and the NCAA, exceed its operating expenses.” The total of 23 “self-sufficient” programs has “remained basically unchanged” since '10.
What? Are you serious?
Well according to Larry’s article above, only 23 of them are self sustaining and that was in 2016. I’m sorry, I thought more of them were.
Once you start paying kids you’ll see programs devise all kinds of ways to pay more. The arms race alone will permanently destroy what we’ve always known to be college sports.
I could actually see programs sink themselves and their schools by trying to keep up.
Not to mention how it could affect costs and the student gameday experience.
Are UT, Stanford, Michigan, and Alabama going to form a conference?
1 Like
There are already many arms races in facilities, coaches, and yes, paying players. Top basketball recruits are getting $100-250k from schools right now.
Are you against players being able to profit off their own image? Schools not giving them anything but the scholarship and stipend like they currently do.
Sports, especially college sports, is supposed to be for friendly competition, recreational pass time and bragging rights not as vehicles to fleece the public.
Students are supposed to be students not paid entertainers.
4 Likes
Ideally yes, but that time has come and gone at the major level. It’s a huge business now and the only people not richly compensated (officially) are the players.
2 Likes
I’ll be done with college sports if they start paying athletes. It’ll save me money on season tickets
2 Likes
Which is why they asked fans to pay 10k for the rights just to buy certain seats at UH. No one is getting fleeced because you voluntarily choose to spend the money. They’re not taxing you unwillingly.
No. Any arms race currently going on is in advertising and PR. When you stratify the college experience by making athletes professionals and leaving ordinary students struggling with college loans you’ve permanently altered higher education…unless you want to have a pro league sponsored by the school.
Universities make hundreds of millions off pharmaceutical research, space-related studies, Medical research, etc. Doesn’t the kid pumping out hours over a petri dish and Raman noodles need his cut too?
I don’t think you can pay one segment of students for their contribution and not the rest.
I’m not saying it’s wrong. Just that it’s going to permanently alter things…and set off waves of lawsuits.
2 Likes
Charging $4 for a bottle of water and not allowing people to bring in their own bottle of water is fleecing the public, in my opinion.
No one is forcing anyone to go through the turnstiles but taking advantage of them by price gouging after they do is BS and not what I think of when I think of sports.
Lol…this reminds me of a friend who was born in Sarajevo.
“We had a nice country.”
Title 9 will have a field day with this. You think that a female tennis player should make as much as the star qb? We have seen title 9 close baseball teams, wrestlin teams and other ‘non revenue’ sports. Can you imagine the complete and total elimination of all scholarship programs on the male side to sustain 85 female scholarships mirroring the football team. those 20 something sustainable athletic departments would be a lot smaller.
It isn’t like once they start to pay the players that all of a sudden ESPN and Fox and NBC would just pour more money in or that Nike and Under Armor would do the same.
It will be amazing to watch. On a side not it is pretty unamerican how the whole system works. I am glad it is, but it is still completely against the grain of how anything else works as a billion dollar busines.