Wrong they are getting reimbursed by getting a valuable education. And the student athletes choose to do it. I dont believe any slave in history chose to be a slave.
Read what I wrote.
In many cases, the value of the education that athletes get is dubious. Even in non-revenue sports, students are often dissuaded from taking challenging courses in order to leave time for their sport, and that’s assuming that practice requirements don’t outright preclude them from taking mandatory courses.
Based on what?
The slavery analogy is inappropriate, incorrect, and over the top. Student athletes choose to play sports, are being compensated via tuition, room, board, free tutoring, etc, and have the right to quit or walk away anytime they like. NOT true of slaves.
Ask twinmom if her son considers himself and his teammates to be slaves. I’m guessing the answer is no.
The only issues here are a) whether or not the NCAA can limit student athlete compensation to just that, and b) if not, then what are the limits to such compensation, if any?
The USSC unanimously agrees that compensation can’t be limited to just that.
Gorsuch believes that compensation can at least include education related stuff.
Kavanaugh goes further and seems to suggest that the only limit is the market itself.
Either way, bad news for less funded schools.
Query: if there are truly no limits to student athlete compensation, then is it accurate to say that SMU did nothing wrong and was unjustly punished by being given the death penalty back in the 80s for buying/paying players?
Please be candid in your responses!
4 Likes
This issue was solely created by the ncaa and the ncaa alone. Can anyone on this forum tell me that the ncaa could not have predicted this?
The ncaa is a non profit organization. At the same time their top hat makes over $2.5M/year.
He makes $2.5M/year for what results?
THE MOST POPULAR AND PROFITABLE ncaa SPORT DOES NOT HAVE A NATIONAL CHAMPION
THE ncaa LET THE CARTEL/CFP CREATION
The ncaa should have been dismantled a long time ago and restructured. We are in this situation because of the D.C. dirty politicians type of management/ruling.
Can you imagine how much easier it’s going to be for UT, ATM, etc to give their players money now ?
1 Like
In World War 2, the government placed caps on pay for many industries. In order to attract talent, companies developed alternative forms of compensation, like PTO and health insurance.
What the NCAA enforces is a cap on money compensation of $0.00, and severe restrictions on other forms of compensation. It just so happens that employment is conditioned on enrolled status as a student. Now the Supreme Court says that cap is anticompetitive and unconstitutional.
I think that’s right, but I also think that arguments from “there’s plenty of cash to go around” are misguided. The bigger problem is that there is so much money involved. It should be eminently feasible to run the whole enterprise at 10% of the current dollar values, closing the gap between players and coaches, admins, TV execs, purveyors of nasty beer and men’s intimate health products, etc., because the larger portion of the ungodly amounts of money goes to a very few who are able to attract it. We should have a better method of evaluating actual individual contribution vs how much others’ input is captured. The market place should do this, but what we have here is not market driven, it is keeping up with the Joneses.
We need to break down restrictions and perverse incentives. Then it won’t matter if you give a player a scholarship or the cash equivalent, the compensation will seem fair. After that, be strict about academic eligibility and let’s just see how many players have time to deal with endorsement obligations.
It would take another case getting to the supreme court to really open things up. How would a lawsuit materialize like that? Could a group of players just sue a university because they wont pay them a salary? Kavanaugh really went outside of the ruling with his opinions, maybe even gives some guidance for future lawsuits under antitrust laws.
I can’t imagine that Kavanaugh’s concurrence will become more widely embraced, but it might. Once it’s out there in a USSC opinion, there’s no guaranteeing it won’t catch on, even if it isn’t binding precedent the way that the lead opinion here would be.
And if it did…then college sports might become far more professional than amateur.
And even if it doesn’t, it doesn’t look good for UH. Goodness knows we don’t have the money to “educationally compensate” a potential recruit the way that a school with far larger athletic revenues (i.e., P5s and blue bloods) would. I can only hope that if it comes down to that, then Tilman Fertitta and other rich, “fat cat” Coogs will have pockets that are deep enough and generous enough to make up the difference.
When I first saw the news update for this on my phone…I said…OH SCHITT!!!
I went to the article, and then immediately came here to post and discuss it, but someone else had already beaten me to it.
I don’t think it will end up being bad for UH. A complete overhaul of college sports with payments could lead to a door opening for us to be with the big boys. We are no where close to the blue bloods right now and they already pay for the top players. I just don’t see that gap getting much wider. I do see it as a possibility to close the gap with the less funded P5 programs. Also an opportunity to separate ourselves more from the majority of G5. Schools like Tulsa and Tulane will suffer though. Maybe makes a radical change where the top 64-80 programs form a new division and I think we would be in that.
1 Like
I sure hope that you are right, but given the size of the deficit that our athletic department typically runs…it’s hard for me to believe that competing under this new framework will be easy for us.
If you can’t limit the compensation why would you be able to limit the time they plied their trade. Why can’t they play for 8 years, 10 years?
The only way this can work is if the colleges sign high school players to employment contracts. For the NFL to draft one of our players they will have to buy them out of our employment contract.
Yep lets commercialize this.
Its going to end up like minor league baseball before the advent of the farm system. The minor leagues make money buy selling players to the major leagues.
1 Like
What legal standing would there be to force an organization to change rules for that? We are still a long way away from straight salaries too. One day the NCAA will get smart and finally start getting ahead of lawsuits and legislature. A system of NIL, extra educational benefits, and the extra cost of living payment could last for 10-20 years before legit action comes on salaries. Really the NCAA could probably keep the system like that for longer than 20 years if they stop trying to be such a-holes to change.
Quotes from an SI article about NIL. They know they screwed up and not doing anything is just making things worse.
“In hindsight, I’m saying ‘S—, why didn’t we act on this in January?’” says one NCAA decision-maker. “We’ve done it to ourselves. Everybody has their own agenda. If we come out of this without doing anything, we are dysfunctional.”
“What a mess,” says another, both granted anonymity to speak with SI . “That’s exactly the right term. It’s a mess. If it doesn’t pass, you’ve got chaos.”
We’ll see.
This NY Times article sums up my fears.
Kavanaugh’s concurrence seems to invite a challenge to the rules against paying athletes.
slaves…too funny.
as someone that greatly benefitted from an athletic scholarship for college, I was neither a slave nor indentured.
who are the rich people? the coaches? I don’t think you truly understand slavery.
It is the reverse. What organization can mandate that the employees only are allowed to work for 4 or 5 years? There is no mandatory retirement age.
Colleges will now base the “eligibility time period” on utility and the likelihood of being drafted in the NFL If you ain’t improving, you ain’t getting paid.
Heck basketball is almost there with the D-League and the foreign leagues.
It is a brave new world. I suspect we will end up being the Skeeters to the Texan"s Astros.
Any can. Especially in Texas, its at will work. What laws say an organization can’t?