Ok so the University of Houston can say, I think my players can play for 10 years. The NCAA can’t tell us to limit the time just like they can’t tell us to limit the compensation.
NCAA is run by the schools. It will say whatever they want to say.
UH plays in the NCAA, they set the rules. If UH doesn’t want to play in the NCAA, then yeah we can let athletes play for however long.
But that is the point of the USSC ruling. The NCAA can’t mandate what the compensation limits are. By saying you can only work for 5 years implicitly has allowed the NCAA to limit your compensation to $0 at year 6.
The employee has a right to work. The market will now dictate how much they make and how long the employee can work.
The USSC ruling was anti-trust. I have no idea how an argument could be made that limiting years allowed to be “employed” is anti-trust. If you can explain how it would be, I am interested. Kavanaugh was pretty clear he is upset about the NCAA making tons of money and keeping a fake system of amateurism in place to not compensate players their true value. They are trying to protect the free market. It wouldn’t really be a free market if the government tells an organization they have to keep employees for more years, that goes against laws for employers currently in non-union states. Maybe a couple justices would support that, but it would be on the opposite side from Kavanaugh. I have never seen a single thing say a limit on years is illegal.
How much money did your sport bring in? How much of that money was people coming to see you?
Picking apart any one part of the metaphor does not make the metaphor altogether false. You should be looking at the ways what I said is true and reflect on that, rather than thinking you are bringing it down with some circumstance I wasn’t talking about.
Do you think the billions of revenue the NCAA make each year are produced by the administrators?
using slavery as your stain on something is somewhat abhorrent
This legitimizes what the UTs, ATMs, etc have done for years in recruiting. Now the P5 schools can offer money, jobs, etc to recruits for their “images” as an inducement to come to the school. Like a lot of laws, good in theory but not in reality
1 Like
So, because we profit so much off these athletes, how do you justify payment when we require $30+million from the university to break even? How much do the non revenue sports cost the university? No other industry requires businesses to support divisions that lose money, does this constitute another court challenge to Title IX?
1 Like
That’s one of the problems I have with all this. College Athletes are not employees. They
are not slaves either. They elect to participate and can freely leave whenever they want. The use of these terms doesn’t apply and as well ss the application of antitrust laws and anticompetitive things.
1 Like
That’s what I said above.
The USSC isn’t buying it though.
1 Like
And that’s a fair point too. It doesn’t “feel” fair that businesses and schools make billions and
millions from this arrangement. These athletes are putting their bodies at risk to provide for our
entertainment. But they are not employees. They are not slaves. It’s a difficult thing to categorize
as the business end of college football has become so big.
At the end of the day, we are in a new world. Let’s hope it doesn’t turn into something we no longer
recognize, cherish, or enjoy.
Well, there is no coogfans penalty for pile-ing on 
What can I say, the USSC has made bad decisions before. Maybe in this
case the NCAA just got out lawyered.
When you devalue education and the cost of education as meaningless, you get dopes saying athletes are slaves.
Tuition, tutors, back office, room, board, trainers, advisors, coaches, facilities. None of this is free. Non-athlete, non-scholarship students don’t receive this either.
The NCAA makes maybe a billion a yr give or take but they return 96% of it back to the conferences so they aren’t keeping it all. Also if the NCAA goes away, the p5s won’t like it for long since you need to have rules otherwise bama pays 30k per player then Kansas st can’t. Also if your paying them then tuition would prob be paid by the athletes, women’s sports have to be paid or cut which hurts women. It opens up all sorts of issues. The ruling was just extra academic stuff so I think it stops there. Most p5s spend it all so you’d have maybe 20 that could afford paying. You then have USC going 5 and 6 and less schools and fan interest nationally would go down. The whole reason for 12 in the playoffs is to increase overall interest bc interest with 4 teams or 20 would hurt tv and come back to bite them. No one wants the NCAA to become professional and fan interest would happen. I’d prob stop watching if they pay salaries for ex so that isn’t going to happen. The ruling was just to add extra academic payments for equipment etc but not paying salaries.
Also, now the NCAA is less likely to impose penalties so it helps us bc they rarely hammer the big dogs, only the smaller fish like smu.Again, it’s not like the NCAA makes a billion and keeps it all, they return it to schools who spend it all to keep their athletic depts going to in turn give ships etc to players that cost 25k or higher per yr which you and me have to pay when sending our kids to school. There is at least a 25k payment to them in that regard.
I would have a little more sympathy for the argument that a free education is sufficient compensation for the players IF the the TV contracts, Bowl Payouts, Playoff payouts and coaches salaries weren’t where they are.
Its a big money business and every TV contract renewal more money is demanded. We pay a coach 4.0 million dollars.
Lets move the money from under the table to on top of the table and have it taxed.
3 Likes
They do need to cap the coaching salaries bc it’s the biggest ex of too much money thrown around. If they did pay athletes which they won’t , coaches would have to take a hit. Coaching salaries need to be addressed.
The free tuition is huge especially now bc again it’s prob 25 k for public then Tulane and privates might be giving 40k or more. We have to pay those prices when sending our kids so it’s a huge benefit that is overlooked in all this. Yrs ago, you could make the argument that it wasn’t much when states gave more support and each semester was $500 a term.
So tuition is $25K and trainers, tutors, advisors, coaches, etc… are free and don’t factor into cost. Good to know.
It’s a conservative guess but they are well compensated if you add up all the costs vs what students pay.