OT: Alston v NCAA

[superjohn]

It's the narrative of the people who don't want to pay student athletes. "Too hard," "too many obstacles," "too much work." They're bad excuses. I'm pretty sure if the NCAA put together their collective brainpower they could find a way to do it, but of course, it's not in the NCAA's best interest, so it's much easier to say "too hard."

If it is, in fact, too hard to figure out how to get kids a share of the value they bring then the system is entirely broken and needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up.

How though? And what are you advocating? It sounds like you want salaries.

The only sport that makes money is men's college basketball. You think $900 million is going to pay for everything? You realize a lot of that money is already going to important things? Are there ways to make it better like NIL and increasing stipend cash probably but what exactly are you advocating and how does it get paid for?

 

[JimCtheGOAT]

Which is why it needs to be done through the NCAA.

It makes sense to not let them have a job, because obviously you'd run into this pretty quickly. But you can't say "no we won't share our astronomical profits with you and you can't have a job elsewhere"

If you can't find a way to pay the people making you money because gosh, it's just too dang difficult to figure out with all these obstacles, the system doesn't work and needs to be overhauled.

Just because you keep repeating something doesn't mean its true. Just because a bi-weekly paycheck doesn't hit their account, doesn't mean they aren't being compensated.

Why do you think people compare "total comp" when looking at jobs. Because all of the other stuff boosts your compensation even if it doesn't go to your paycheck. This isn't a difficult concept and one that has been discussed ad nauseum. Plenty of good arguments on both sides. The one you are making isn't one of them.

Go ahead and conduct a poll of college athletes and ask them how many would give up their tuition, room and board, food, travel, clothing, shoes, gear etc in exchange for being able to apply for a job at the best buy down the street. I'm sure they would be lining up.

 

[businesslawyer]

BINGO.

What will have to happen is Congress will carve out an anti-trust exemption.

Seriously? The Senate couldn't put 60 votes together to carve a turkey on Thanksgiving. If the courts ever get around to throwing out the current system, Congress isn't going to be the answer.

 

[krinklecut]

How though? And what are you advocating? It sounds like you want salaries.

The only sport that makes money is men's college basketball. You think $900 million is going to pay for everything? You realize a lot of that money is already going to important things? Are there ways to make it better like NIL and increasing stipend cash probably but what exactly are you advocating and how does it get paid for?

I don't know, I'm just some shmuck. What I do know, though, is that the current system is horribly wrong, and there are much smarter people than me involved who can find a way to make it work. And if they can't find a way to make it work, college basketball as it is now should die.

 

[superjohn]

I don't know, I'm just some shmuck. What I do know, though, is that the current system is horribly wrong, and there are much smarter people than me involved who can find a way to make it work. And if they can't find a way to make it work, college basketball as it is now should die.

I don't mean to be a pain in the rear but make what work? You still haven't said what you want done. You want salaries for every single NCAA D1 athlete?

 

[krinklecut]

I don't mean to be a pain in the rear but make what work? You still haven't said what you want done. You want salaries for every single NCAA D1 athlete?

I want the people who make many many people millionaires, and bring millions to institutions and corporations, to be compensated equitably

 

[huskymedic]

 

[polycom]

Salaries won't work for 100k reasons. But NCAA shouldn't own anyones likeness. Why can random students make money on ticktok but NCAA athletes can't? Why can musicians make money on spotify but athletes can't? The list goes on and on...it's just silly rules because NCAA doesn't want to share the pot.

 

[superjohn]

I want the people who make many many people millionaires, and bring millions to institutions and corporations, to be compensated equitably

That's where it gets extremely complicated. Should each player on each program get paid off of the amount of dollars they bring to the NCAA each season from basketball? Does each player get paid the same even though some are clearly more "valuable." Should Bouknight get paid x amount of dollars and Richie Springs gets nothing? Should the D1 athletes of pretty much every other team in every other sport get paid nothing because they make no money for anyone? Should the UConn women be the only female athletes who get paid? Should Paige Bueckers be getting paid way more than everyone else in NCAA sports because she's driving all the money...

I see so many more problems and so many more court cases associated with salaries than I do with how things are currently.

 

[freescooter]

The current system is pretty bad but if you throw it out you will end up very Likely with something much much worse. The P5 will probably become semi-pro leagues for major sports. Others won’t be able to compete even more than they can’t compete now. So it’s likely you’ll have several more divisions. Or more likely college sports and P5 sports. And in the end, the P5 will need to create an NCAA of their own because, well can you imagine the SEC schools not cheating? Or Arizona?

Then you have the problems of who makes what, I can indeed see Paige Bueckers getting a deal to pitch Dunkin’ Donuts. So how do her teammates react? And does UConn get a cut of her earnings? After all, she is getting this largely because she plays at UConn and got her publicity from that association. Maybe UConn acts like IMG for its athletes and Michigan plays that role for its...it places players with Certain companies in return for a percentage.

Really what has happened is that athletics and the money associated with it has gotten out of control to the point where college athletics no longer makes any sense. when programs didn’t make any money, or maybe paid for themselves and when players actually stayed for 4 years and were real students, getting a scholarship meant something. In an era where guys leave effectively after 1 1/2 semesters to sign multi million dollar contracts it doesn’t mean very much.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I want the people who make many many people millionaires, and bring millions to institutions and corporations, to be compensated equitably

It is a myth that this occurs. At least the way you frame it. We will find out soon, as HS athletes will be able to jump direct to the G league. Most programs lose money, especially at football. UConn isn't profiting, it is subsidizing those athletes. That's the reality.
How about Alabama football? Yes it makes money. And Jalen Hurts can leave Alabama and go to Oklahoma, and the Alabama fans...they don't care and keep rooting for Alabama. Joe Burrow can leave Ohio State and go to LSU and...nobody at Ohio State cares, they root for Ohio State. Were URI fans rooting for UConn this year because Martin brought so much value?

The schools have massive alumni followings along with those who have state or local pride in those teams and have many decades building their brands. That's why they have fans, that's why the make money. Are the players "fairly compensated", most are probably overcompensated. Certainly being admitted to universities you may not otherwise qualify to attend, at no cost, is a form of compensation right? Are the absolute star players, the best of the best, worth more than that on an open market? Yes. But the women's field hockey team at UConn, which is awesome, is financially worth close to zero. So you want to what? End scholarships for women's sports? Not provide them fields, coaches and uniforms? Because that's what the result would be.

 

[krinklecut]

It is a myth that this occurs. At least the way you frame it. We will find out soon, as HS athletes will be able to jump direct to the G league. Most programs lose money, especially at football. UConn isn't profiting, it is subsidizing those athletes. That's the reality.
How about Alabama football? Yes it makes money. And Jalen Hurts can leave Alabama and go to Oklahoma, and the Alabama fans...they don't care and keep rooting for Alabama. Joe Burrow can leave Ohio State and go to LSU and...nobody at Ohio State cares, they root for Ohio State. Were URI fans rooting for UConn this year because Martin brought so much value?

The schools have massive alumni followings along with those who have state or local pride in those teams and have many decades building their brands. That's why they have fans, that's why the make money. Are the players "fairly compensated", most are probably overcompensated. Certainly being admitted to universities you may not otherwise qualify to attend, at no cost, is a form of compensation right? Are the absolute star players, the best of the best, worth more than that on an open market? Yes. But the women's field hockey team at UConn, which is awesome, is financially worth close to zero. So you want to what? End scholarships for women's sports? Not provide them fields, coaches and uniforms? Because that's what the result would be.

It's not a myth that many people are millionaires because of college basketball, institutions like the NCAA make millions, and corporations like Nike make millions.

 

[huskymedic]