NCAA HOOPS THREAD! -- K petitions to get Maui Jim Maui Invitational moved to Transylvania (2 Viewers)

[roadkill1292]

This already happens. "Sign here and I will make you a lottery pick." "I will get you that multimillion dollar shoe contract." etc. Except in this scenario, someone is actually ponying up and paying that money to the kid instead of it being based on hopes and dreams of it being delivered on the back end. 

Let the shoe companies spend $200K each on 10 kids. 2 will probably be a slam dunk investment. 3 will be a pretty good investment. 3 will have a negative ROI. 2 will likely be money flushed down the toilet. The next year, they'll use that info to decide how to better spend the next $2MM. And on we go. 

The shoe companies and UnderArmour getting into the act will really be wild cards and kids with the talent potential to take a team to the final four will make a killing. And then Warren Buffett could decide to take a day's income and spend it on a few super recruits for Okie State football that Debbil Nick might have gotten instead.  The scenarios are endless and it'll be a terrible, glorious mess.

 

[RUSF18]

Lets say the endorsement thing happens.  We cool with a 5* QB (or RB, or Point guard, of whatever) player coming out on social media and flat out telling the world he's open to the highest bidder to do a "commercial"?  Then you've got Bob's Ribshack in Tuscaloosa setting up a go-fund me account for Bama fans to donate a couple of bucks to the cause. A week later, All American Joe Smith is collecting a half a mil for a 30 second spot and the Tide have their QB for 3 years.

Because that's where things are going if you open up that possibility. It will basically become crowd-funded player auctions.  (Or maybe Phil Knight will just set aside $5 Million a year for a Nike ad to fund Oregon's recruiting class)

Yes. As long as he pays taxes on the income, of course. 

Bob's Ribshack can get that money to All American Joe Smith already. It's happening right now as we speak. So if it's out in the open, maybe the amounts change and get bigger. Not my problem and if that kid makes more money because of it, all the power to him.

And if AAJS turns out not to be such a good player, like not even an actual All American, maybe Bob doesn't decide to put in the first $250K of that crowdfunded campaign the next time a big QB comes on the market. Or maybe AAJS throws a big pick in the SEC title game and Bob's customers get pissed that this was the guy Bob got for Bama and they suddenly stop buying his ribs. 

 

[Good Posting Judge]

Lets say the endorsement thing happens.  We cool with a 5* QB (or RB, or Point guard, of whatever) player coming out on social media and flat out telling the world he's open to the highest bidder to do a "commercial"? 

Sure.

For a one-and-done, absent them being able to just get drafted directly into the NBA, playing in college is probably better option than chilling for a year and going to IMG, or playing in some hellhole European league, in terms of their future prospects. That doesn't mean they're not getting exploited and having other people get rich off their labor for a year.

 

[roadkill1292]

Lets say the endorsement thing happens.  We cool with a 5* QB (or RB, or Point guard, of whatever) player coming out on social media and flat out telling the world he's open to the highest bidder to do a "commercial"?  Then you've got Bob's Ribshack in Tuscaloosa setting up a go-fund me account for Bama fans to donate a couple of bucks to the cause. A week later, All American Joe Smith is collecting a half a mil for a 30 second spot and the Tide have their QB for 3 years.

Because that's where things are going if you open up that possibility. It will basically become crowd-funded player auctions.  (Or maybe Phil Knight will just set aside $5 Million a year for a Nike ad to fund Oregon's recruiting class)

The crowdfunding idea is a really good one. Yeah, that's ok by me, what's the problem?

 

[Capella]

Boeheim addressed this on Saturday. You'll have coaches promising kids x amount of dollars in endorsements to come to the school. Boosters will get involved. Businesses negotiating with high school kids and parents. We want schools/boosters in cahoots with advertisers, getting into bidding wars for high school kids? Seems like it opens up a huge can of worms.

Sounds great. It’s happening now btw 

 

[Capella]

Lets say the endorsement thing happens.  We cool with a 5* QB (or RB, or Point guard, of whatever) player coming out on social media and flat out telling the world he's open to the highest bidder to do a "commercial"?  Then you've got Bob's Ribshack in Tuscaloosa setting up a go-fund me account for Bama fans to donate a couple of bucks to the cause. A week later, All American Joe Smith is collecting a half a mil for a 30 second spot and the Tide have their QB for 3 years.

Because that's where things are going if you open up that possibility. It will basically become crowd-funded player auctions.  (Or maybe Phil Knight will just set aside $5 Million a year for a Nike ad to fund Oregon's recruiting class)

For the record, the only athletes that are getting screwed by the NCAA are star football football players capable of being drafted earlier than their junior year (but can't because of NFL rules). Any basketball player that is good enough to get paid more than the value of a scholarship/everything that comes with it has an avenue available to do so. Good enough to go to the NBA after your freshman year? Go right ahead. Good enough to play pro ball somewhere but not quite good enough for the NBA? Drop out of school, update your passport and get on a plane to Lithuania. Want to skip college all together to avoid being "exploited"? Sign with an agent out of HS and spend your 9 months in private workouts preparing for the draft (like Mitchell Robinson is currently doing) or sign a deal overseas (like Mudiay did)

The guys that go to school for a year or stay in school for extra years do so because they recognize that its the best way to achieve their life goals (whether its a successful NBA/NFL career or a diploma that can give them other options). Every basketball player out there has a viable option to avoid their 1-4 years of indentured servitude. They just choose not to do so because.....SHOCKER......its a better decision for them financially than trying their luck in the Bulgarian B league.

Sounds great. What’s the problem?

 

[Capella]

Basically every response is OH NOES WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO IF THE MARKET DETERMINES THESE PLAYERS ARE ALL WORTH A TON OF MONEY 

Amazing. 

 

[Sammy3469]

Sounds great. What’s the problem?

Kids getting paid?  I also think much of the basketball side will solve itself by the next time the NBA CBA gets negotiated.  With the NBA teams' themselves running G League teams, you'll end up with a system more akin to baseball and hockey with the Bagley's and Ayton's of the world going straight to the league from HS.  Silver's too smart to let the NCAA leech anymore.  

 

[RUSF18]

Basically every response is OH NOES WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO IF THE MARKET DETERMINES THESE PLAYERS ARE ALL WORTH A TON OF MONEY 

Amazing. 

Is it because people really believe the playing field should be even, when it never was? Is it because they experienced success in the past, and think that this change would never get their schools back to the glory days? Is it because college sports and associated teams' success makes up way too much of their self-worth?

Basically, is the reason I have personally never had a problem with letting these kids get paid because I went to and root for Rutgers?

 

[TLEF316]

Sounds great. What’s the problem?

I mean, if everyone is truly ok with it, fine. 

I think it would make the whole process pretty lame to watch, but I'm not naive enough to think these kids are picking the school because they love the engineering program. Obviously plenty of guys are getting paid under the table anyway.

 

[TLEF316]

Sure.

For a one-and-done, absent them being able to just get drafted directly into the NBA, playing in college is probably better option than chilling for a year and going to IMG, or playing in some hellhole European league, in terms of their future prospects. That doesn't mean they're not getting exploited and having other people get rich off their labor for a year.

If you make a choice to do something even though there are other  viable options, are you really being exploited?

You can make the argument that 1 and done basketball players don't have a great alternative. But they do have alternatives. 

I have zero sympathy for a junior who goes back to school trying to improve his draft stock and then cries about being exploited.  

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Why is it kids can go straight to the pros in baseball, tennis, golf and hockey, to name a few?  It's because those sports generate no money for colleges and the NCAA.  But in basketball and football they HAVE to go to at least some college.  It's criminal that we don't make a bigger deal out of this. Profit off these children while they can, force them into playing by the NCAA rules and then act like the "education" they receive is just compensation.  It's not.   

"One and done" is an NBA rule not an NCAA rule - the NBA is doing it to protect themselves from making bad draft picks on HS players. It is criminal and imo bad for college basketball. Personally I'd rather see lesser players that stick around while we watch them develop then a superstar that drops out of his classes the day the season ends.

I know the notion of "student athlete" is long gone but the "one and done" guys just make it that much worse. Is anyone really rooting for Duke basketball now, or just some hired mercenaries that wear the uniform for one season?

A kid that isn't there for any other reason than to get his one season in, should be allowed to just go pro. NBA teams can send the kid overseas for a season if they want him to develop a little before taking up a roster spot.

The NFL rule makes some sense in that a HS is nowhere near ready to compete physically.

 

[JuniorGong]

Those trying to protect the status quo here remind me of gun nuts railing against any gun reform.

 

[RUSF18]

If you make a choice to do something even though there are other  viable options, are you really being exploited? 

Says the pimp to his ho. 

 

[Nipsey]

Sounds great. It’s happening now btw 

The hell it is.

 

[TLEF316]

Says the pimp to his ho. 

Yeah, this is a fair comparison.....

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Kids getting paid?  I also think much of the basketball side will solve itself by the next time the NBA CBA gets negotiated.  With the NBA teams' themselves running G League teams, you'll end up with a system more akin to baseball and hockey with the Bagley's and Ayton's of the world going straight to the league from HS.  Silver's too smart to let the NCAA leech anymore.  

I think the best thing would be letting kids go pro from high school and letting the NBA sort out how to pay them and where to roster them.  And I'd still be fine paying players after that but want to see how it's going to work that's going to satisfy Title IV.  That's probably a lot easier doing it openly when the 6 figure guys are all going straight to the pros instead of whoring themselves out to a college for a year.

 

[roadkill1292]

If you make a choice to do something even though there are other  viable options, are you really being exploited?

You can make the argument that 1 and done basketball players don't have a great alternative. But they do have alternatives. 

I have zero sympathy for a junior who goes back to school trying to improve his draft stock and then cries about being exploited.  

I think we can define it as exploitation any time there is collusion to fix compensation, even if the compensation is fixed at a level higher than some other available options. 

 

[Hooper31]

We cool with a 5* QB (or RB, or Point guard, of whatever) player coming out on social media and flat out telling the world he's open to the highest bidder to do a "commercial"?  Then you've got Bob's Ribshack in Tuscaloosa setting up a go-fund me account for Bama fans to donate a couple of bucks to the cause. A week later, All American Joe Smith is collecting a half a mil for a 30 second spot and the Tide have their QB for 3 years.

Because that's where things are going if you open up that possibility. It will basically become crowd-funded player auctions.  (Or maybe Phil Knight will just set aside $5 Million a year for a Nike ad to fund Oregon's recruiting class)

I don't think that's exactly how it would pan out, but I have no problem with any of this. Even if it did the free market would adjust over time. 

Would you have a problem with any corporation throwing money at accountants, programmers, etc in their businesses in order to recruit the best young talent? Oh, that already happens to a degree? Corporations paying bonuses to sign young talent straight out of college (or high school). Why would there be a problem with any young person getting paid for their potential?

Highest bidders don't always land the best contracts. There are lots of subtleties involved here. We can't assume that players, colleges, and communities will drop the lowest common denominator of highest bidder wins. That's not what happens in reality. 

 

[Aerial Assault]

Basically every response is OH NOES WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO IF THE MARKET DETERMINES THESE PLAYERS ARE ALL WORTH A TON OF MONEY 

Amazing. 

Nah, my response was: why are "institutions of higher learning" moving enough cash to embarrass Jared Kushner's money laundering team?      

I'm great with the TV contract money going to (1) a set amount to compensate the players, allocated in some fashion, to eliminate the sleaze from the system; (2) money to pay for an actual enforcement apparatus to police the sleaze elimination; and (3) equal shares distributed to each Division I (or FBS) school's general fund to be earmarked for projects that benefit all students.  There's no need for Conference President X to be making millions of dollars a year.  

 

[Spartans Rule]

For the record, the only athletes that are getting screwed by the NCAA are star football football players capable of being drafted earlier than their junior year (but can't because of NFL rules). Any basketball player that is good enough to get paid more than the value of a scholarship/everything that comes with it has an avenue available to do so. Good enough to go to the NBA after your freshman year? Go right ahead. Good enough to play pro ball somewhere but not quite good enough for the NBA? Drop out of school, update your passport and get on a plane to Lithuania. Want to skip college all together to avoid being "exploited"? Sign with an agent out of HS and spend your 9 months in private workouts preparing for the draft (like Mitchell Robinson is currently doing) or sign a deal overseas (like Mudiay did)

The guys that go to school for a year or stay in school for extra years do so because they recognize that its the best way to achieve their life goals (whether its a successful NBA/NFL career or a diploma that can give them other options). Every basketball player out there has a viable option to avoid their 1-4 years of indentured servitude. They just choose not to do so because.....SHOCKER......its a better decision for them financially than trying their luck in the Bulgarian B league.

I agree that it's not really a matter of the athletes getting screwed. Playing college sports is still an awesome opportunity. There's a reason the guy in my avatar is still in college when he could've been a lottery pick already. Being a hero to a giant fan base and competing for a national championship is probably way more fun than being the 9th man on a mediocre NBA team. And to a lot of the non-elite players, the free education is worth a ton.

But the reality is they are making millions for the universities, and as long as they're not getting paid, there's going to be a black market for their services. That's just capitalism. For the NCAA to keep going to absurd lengths to shut down that black market, and acting like it's doing the Lord's work when it's really just trying to protect its profits, is nauseating. Way more nauseating than say...

Lets say the endorsement thing happens.  We cool with a 5* QB (or RB, or Point guard, of whatever) player coming out on social media and flat out telling the world he's open to the highest bidder to do a "commercial"?  Then you've got Bob's Ribshack in Tuscaloosa setting up a go-fund me account for Bama fans to donate a couple of bucks to the cause. A week later, All American Joe Smith is collecting a half a mil for a 30 second spot and the Tide have their QB for 3 years.

Because that's where things are going if you open up that possibility. It will basically become crowd-funded player auctions.  (Or maybe Phil Knight will just set aside $5 Million a year for a Nike ad to fund Oregon's recruiting class)

So yeah. Let's do this. It will still be kind of screwed up but at least we can be out in the open about what college sports really are.

 

[RUSF18]

Nah, my response was: why are "institutions of higher learning" moving enough cash to embarrass Jared Kushner's money laundering team?      

I'm great with the TV contract money going to (1) a set amount to compensate the players, allocated in some fashion, to eliminate the sleaze from the system; (2) money to pay for an actual enforcement apparatus to police the sleaze elimination; and (3) equal shares distributed to each Division I (or FBS) school's general fund to be earmarked for projects that benefit all students.  There's no need for Conference President X to be making millions of dollars a year.  

Don't forget that these athletic departments manage to keep their tax-exempt status by being wedged into the university framework, even though many of them are generating more in annual revenue than companies we all use/purchase from/interact with every day. 

And while money isn't going into a "student fund", important to keep in mind that even when football and basketball teams are paying their coaches multi-millions and investing in ridiculous facilities, many are also using a good amount of that leftover money to fund the other 20 or so men's and women's programs within the AD. 

Unfortunately your (1) can't really happen unless the schools break free from the NCAA and basically operate as a true minor league for the pros, Title IX and all. 

 

[TLEF316]

I don't think that's exactly how it would pan out, but I have no problem with any of this. Even if it did the free market would adjust over time. 

Would you have a problem with any corporation throwing money at accountants, programmers, etc in their businesses in order to recruit the best young talent? Oh, that already happens to a degree? Corporations paying bonuses to sign young talent straight out of college (or high school). Why would there be a problem with any young person getting paid for their potential?

Highest bidders don't always land the best contracts. There are lots of subtleties involved here. We can't assume that players, colleges, and communities will drop the lowest common denominator of highest bidder wins. That's not what happens in reality. 

Of course I don't have a problem with a company paying signing bonuses to entice young talent. That's how the professional world works.

But that doesn't work for college sports. Title 9 won't allow schools to pay football players 100k a year in cash while the women's field hockey team gets nothing (or just much less)

 

[Aerial Assault]

Don't forget that these athletic departments manage to keep their tax-exempt status by being wedged into the university framework, even though many of them are generating more in annual revenue than companies we all use/purchase from/interact with every day. 

And while money isn't going into a "student fund", important to keep in mind that even when football and basketball teams are paying their coaches multi-millions and investing in ridiculous facilities, many are also using a good amount of that leftover money to fund the other 20 or so men's and women's programs within the AD. 

They can pay taxes too; that's fine with me.  And yes, I should have added funding the non-revenue athletic programs (which is a drop in the bucket, but I still should have included that as my fourth use of the money).  Good catch. 

 

[Moe.]

Big-time athletics should have never been tied to our institutions of higher learning, but that cat is out of the bag. Now it's time for the players to be allowed to get money. I always think of someone like Keilani Ricketts during these conversations. She was one of the most famous athletes at OU her last couple of years. If allowed she would have been able to make a lot of money. It's mostly football and basketball, but there are other athletes out there who should be allowed to capitalize on their fame/earning potential. 

 

[roadkill1292]

Nah, my response was: why are "institutions of higher learning" moving enough cash to embarrass Jared Kushner's money laundering team?      

I'm great with the TV contract money going to (1) a set amount to compensate the players, allocated in some fashion, to eliminate the sleaze from the system; (2) money to pay for an actual enforcement apparatus to police the sleaze elimination; and (3) equal shares distributed to each Division I (or FBS) school's general fund to be earmarked for projects that benefit all students.  There's no need for Conference President X to be making millions of dollars a year.  

Man, we are coming up with all kinds of great ideas today for getting money to the kids. If I was president of a tv network with exclusive rights to a particular conference, I could set up funds for my conference's schools to use for attracting the best players. Fox vs CBS vs ESPN. Awesome, AA. 

 

[roadkill1292]

Of course I don't have a problem with a company paying signing bonuses to entice young talent. That's how the professional world works.

But that doesn't work for college sports. Title 9 won't allow schools to pay football players 100k a year in cash while the women's field hockey team gets nothing (or just much less)

You're about the last person here still talking about the schools and Title IX. The available money outside schools is much bigger and not subject to Title IX.

 

[Hooper31]

Of course I don't have a problem with a company paying signing bonuses to entice young talent. That's how the professional world works.

But that doesn't work for college sports. Title 9 won't allow schools to pay football players 100k a year in cash while the women's field hockey team gets nothing (or just much less)

Title 9 is a law about equal access, not how much money someone makes outside of the classroom. 

 

[Aerial Assault]

Man, we are coming up with all kinds of great ideas today for getting money to the kids. If I was president of a tv network with exclusive rights to a particular conference, I could set up funds for my conference's schools to use for attracting the best players. Fox vs CBS vs ESPN. Awesome, AA. 

I would want a cap, though, which is what I meant by "allocated in some fashion," so I wasn't really calling for a TV bidding war.  Dunno.   

And eliminate the stupid one-and-done rule while we're at it.  I may be a Duke fan but I'm just as tired of the forced mercenaries as anyone. 

 

[Good Posting Judge]

I have zero sympathy for a junior who goes back to school trying to improve his draft stock and then cries about being exploited.  

Is this an actual example that exists?

 

[Good Posting Judge]

I would want a cap, though, which is what I meant by "allocated in some fashion," so I wasn't really calling for a TV bidding war.  Dunno.   

And eliminate the stupid one-and-done rule while we're at it.  I may be a Duke fan but I'm just as tired of the forced mercenaries as anyone. 

That would be nice, but that ball is in the NBA's court.

 

[Aerial Assault]

Title 9 is a law about equal access, not how much money someone makes outside of the classroom. 

Right.  Under my (very loose) idea, the TV contract money for college football and basketball would go into a fund that would be allocated for the benefit of students at the NCAA's member schools, which would include Title IX-compliant funding. 

Compensating male players does not, in my opinion, violate Title IX. 

 

[Aerial Assault]

That would be nice, but that ball is in the NBA's court.

Sure.  And I think Silver - a Duke grad BTW - is really on his horse to get rid of it.  I'm pretty sure this next class of freshmen, or maybe the following one, will be the last OADs, thank the stars. 

 

[Nipsey]

Boeheim on allowing college players to do endorsements:

https://youtu.be/v4IISkuqDsg?t=13m44s

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Big-time athletics should have never been tied to our institutions of higher learning, but that cat is out of the bag. Now it's time for the players to be allowed to get money. I always think of someone like Keilani Ricketts during these conversations. She was one of the most famous athletes at OU her last couple of years. If allowed she would have been able to make a lot of money. It's mostly football and basketball, but there are other athletes out there who should be allowed to capitalize on their fame/earning potential. 

Nobody is watching minor league basketball, football, or for the most part baseball.  While the players make a crapload of money for these schools, they also benefit significantly from the exposure that comes from playing at the school.  Johnny the booster might pay you to go play basketball for Louisville but he ain't paying you to go play for some minor league team in Louisville that gives away free hot dogs and still sells only 1500 tickets per game.

As mentioned before the one and done rule needs to go away.  Let the NBA figure out how to pay these kids that want to be paid straight out of high school.  The NCAA can do the right thing and let the undrafted kids choose a college in July after the NBA draft for the cases where you have a kid that thinks he's a lottery pick but he's really the 8th man on a G league team.  

 

[roadkill1292]

I would want a cap, though, which is what I meant by "allocated in some fashion," so I wasn't really calling for a TV bidding war.  Dunno.   

And eliminate the stupid one-and-done rule while we're at it.  I may be a Duke fan but I'm just as tired of the forced mercenaries as anyone. 

For a cap you'll need to negotiate one with an authorized representative of the athletes somehow, which sounds like a problem to me. There's a cap now, which is the potential legal issue because it's set unilaterally.

 

[Hooper31]

Sure.  And I think Silver - a Duke grad BTW - is really on his horse to get rid of it.  I'm pretty sure this next class of freshmen, or maybe the following one, will be the last OADs, thank the stars. 

According to Google....

In 2016, the NBA and NBA Players Association met to work on a new CBA, which both sides approved in December of that year. This most recent agreement will start with the 2017–18 season and run through 2023–24, with a mutual opt-out after 2022–23.

Not sure if the one and done rule is part of the current NBA CBA. If it is that's a problem that we might be stuck with for a few more years. 

 

[TLEF316]

Is this an actual example that exists?

Sure. Nigel Hayes from Wisconsin last year

 

[Aerial Assault]

According to Google....

Not sure if the one and done rule is part of the current NBA CBA. If it is that's a problem that we might be stuck with for a few more years. 

It is definitely a collectively bargained element, but - and I am no NBA expert - everyone seems to think that OADs are almost certainly on the way out very soon, certainly much sooner than 2024.  So everyone must be anticipating a renegotiated CBA with that amended provision and perhaps some others. 

For a cap you'll need to negotiate one with an authorized representative of the athletes somehow, which sounds like a problem to me. There's a cap now, which is the potential legal issue because it's set unilaterally.

I don't think so.  But I also don't have a problem with agents representing college players who are getting paid, to advise them on various opportunities, etc.  It happens anyway so let's shine a light on it and legitimize it.  Basically it's the legalization-of-marijuana argument as applied to the cesspool of college athletics. 

 

[Moe.]

Nobody is watching minor league basketball, football, or for the most part baseball.  While the players make a crapload of money for these schools, they also benefit significantly from the exposure that comes from playing at the school.  Johnny the booster might pay you to go play basketball for Louisville but he ain't paying you to go play for some minor league team in Louisville that gives away free hot dogs and still sells only 1500 tickets per game.

As mentioned before the one and done rule needs to go away.  Let the NBA figure out how to pay these kids that want to be paid straight out of high school.  The NCAA can do the right thing and let the undrafted kids choose a college in July after the NBA draft for the cases where you have a kid that thinks he's a lottery pick but he's really the 8th man on a G league team.  

Then we need to have a system in place where that booster is allowed to give the kid money. Win win. 

I do think that if the top 18-21 year olds were sequestered into their own professional league in either basketball or football people would watch, but that isn't really relevant.  

Whether or not the public at-large pays attention doesn't really matter, as far as it factors into their future earnings potential. I don't think youth league matches or reserve matches get a ton of eyeballs in Europe but rest assured the right people are watching. The professional leagues will find the talent wherever it may be. 

 

[RUSF18]

Nobody is watching minor league basketball, football, or for the most part baseball.

No one is watching it because there is already a de facto minor league basketball and football league playing games that everyone is already watching. But strip that away, shift the talent to an actual minor league, and of course people would watch.

To argue otherwise means that these networks are paying billions of dollars a year for people to watch jerseys compete. It has nothing to do with who is in those jerseys, it's all about the schools and their history and their fight songs and their rivalries. And as soon as you swap those uniforms for nothing but a solid colored jersey, viewership would plummet.

Of course that is ridiculous. As it would be for me to claim that it is entirely about the players and nothing about the schools. We can have a pretty good argument about what piece of the pie each contributes, but I can guarantee any agreed upon number would still be wildly different than how the revenue pie is shared. 

 

[Nipsey]

If you pay athletes in sports that make money what about athletes whose sports lose money? Put those kids on the hook for that money? Just get rid of the sports that lose money?

 

[RUSF18]

If you pay athletes in sports that make money what about athletes whose sports lose money? Put those kids on the hook for that money? Just get rid of the sports that lose money?

Hi Nips,

Let us know when you catch up. Have a good day. 

 

[Aerial Assault]

No one is watching it because there is already a de facto minor league basketball and football league playing games that everyone is already watching. But strip that away, shift the talent to an actual minor league, and of course people would watch.

To argue otherwise means that these networks are paying billions of dollars a year for people to watch jerseys compete. It has nothing to do with who is in those jerseys, it's all about the schools and their history and their fight songs and their rivalries. And as soon as you swap those uniforms for nothing but a solid colored jersey, viewership would plummet.

Of course that is ridiculous. As it would be for me to claim that it is entirely about the players and nothing about the schools. We can have a pretty good argument about what piece of the pie each contributes, but I can guarantee any agreed upon number would still be wildly different than how the revenue pie is shared. 

The current sharing of that revenue pie is what really bothers me.  It makes absolutely no sense.  When I see the salaries being pulled in by some of these empty suit idiots who are conference presidents and athletic directors, not to mention states with massive budget and social problems (e.g., the opioid epidemic or homelessness) making the football or basketball coach of the flagship public university the state's highest-paid employee, it does not sit well.  

 

[Nipsey]

Hi Nips,

Let us know when you catch up. Have a good day. 

The thread or the issue?

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

No one is watching it because there is already a de facto minor league basketball and football league playing games that everyone is already watching. But strip that away, shift the talent to an actual minor league, and of course people would watch.

To argue otherwise means that these networks are paying billions of dollars a year for people to watch jerseys compete. It has nothing to do with who is in those jerseys, it's all about the schools and their history and their fight songs and their rivalries. And as soon as you swap those uniforms for nothing but a solid colored jersey, viewership would plummet.

Of course that is ridiculous. As it would be for me to claim that it is entirely about the players and nothing about the schools. We can have a pretty good argument about what piece of the pie each contributes, but I can guarantee any agreed upon number would still be wildly different than how the revenue pie is shared. 

I really don't think people would watch.  The majority of college sports fans are fans because they are tied to their schools and their rivalries and that stuff you mentioned.  Then you have your gamblers that watch.  There are probably very few people watching because of the "talent".  That said, don't misinterpret me and think I'm saying the "talent" doesn't deserve to get paid because I haven't said that at all.

I 100% agree the revenue pie sharing needs to be fixed.  Football is it's own beast because 18 year old kids cannot go straight to the NFL.  Their bodies cannot handle it and someone would get seriously injured.  I do think schools should be able to use football revenue to pay for other sports but I think they should compensate those players too long before building these multi millon dollar locker rooms and weight rooms.  I think administrators and coaches make way too much money too but hard to say we shouldn't cap athletes potential income and cry about how much an administrator makes if they system pays them that.   For basketball, as mentioned getting the one and done rule eliminated by the NBA will be a huge first step.  The top 10-15 kids in most high school classes can just go pro and get paid there instead of college.  College ratings and NCAA tournament revenue aren't going to suffer because D. Ayton, Bagley, or Trae Young aren't playing and they went pro.  Use that money to pay the kids that are playing.  And let these guys test the water each year and if they aren't drafted allow them to come back to college instead of screwing them over and making them ineligible.  The only person that will fight most of this is Mark Emmert and his ##### staff.

I have no real comments on the booster money.  I think we could pay every basketball and football player $5M/year somehow and boosters are still going to funnel money to kids for an extra advantage.  If that's legal so be it.  If it's not let the FBI deal with it.

 

[TLEF316]

If you guys think that women's basketball players are just gonna sit back and smile while men's basketball players are getting paid, you're really not paying attention.

There will be equal pay lawsuits. The US women's soccer (and I believe hockey) team did so and there will be lawyers lined up around the block trying to get money for the women, despite the fact that nobody watches

 

[Spartans Rule]

If you pay athletes in sports that make money what about athletes whose sports lose money? Put those kids on the hook for that money? Just get rid of the sports that lose money?

That pretty much already happens with sports that a school doesn't offer at the varsity level. Club teams are formed and the players have to cover their own equipment and travel costs if they want to play.

Economically it's kinda silly for a university to send the women's field hockey team around the country to play games in front of 8 people. But on the other hand it's a cool opportunity for the kids and probably better use of the money than paying the conference commissioner a few million a year.

 

[roadkill1292]

If you guys think that women's basketball players are just gonna sit back and smile while men's basketball players are getting paid, you're really not paying attention.

There will be equal pay lawsuits. The US women's soccer (and I believe hockey) team did so and there will be lawyers lined up around the block trying to get money for the women, despite the fact that nobody watches

I wish them good luck proving that Booster Bob owes one of them a car commercial because he filmed one with the star forward on the men's team.

 

[RUSF18]

If you guys think that women's basketball players are just gonna sit back and smile while men's basketball players are getting paid, you're really not paying attention.

There will be equal pay lawsuits. The US women's soccer (and I believe hockey) team did so and there will be lawyers lined up around the block trying to get money for the women, despite the fact that nobody watches

If those women want to go and sue Nike, Adidas, and UA for not giving them equal endorsement pay as the men, they are free to.

I'm assuming WNBA players have already filed many similar suits looking for comparative pay to their male professional counterparts?