Fair pay to play act just signed in to law in CA.

[Guapo]

So let the boosters, car dealerships, lawyers, etc, start a minor league and leave the college game alone.

Well that shipped sailed in like 1890 so

 

[Exit 4]

So let the boosters, car dealerships, lawyers, etc, start a minor league and leave the college game alone.

Ha, elected officials wont be able to help themselves. The CA bill will probably be mirrored in other states well before 2023. Once we open the door for sponsorships, direct pay from universities could soon follow.

 

[Guapo]

So we all agree that all college football and basketball games should be 5 dollar general admission seating, first come first serve throughout the stadium or arena, right? There should no advertising in the stadium, right? No TV commercials and all broadcast should be on PBS, right? Coaches and ADs should be paid like professors and be required to teach PE classes, right?

Because college athletics is just a an amateur sporting event, not a business, right?

 

[Exit 4]

So we all agree that all college football and basketball games should be 5 dollar general admission seating, first come first serve throughout the stadium or arena, right? There should no advertising in the stadium, right? No TV commercials and all broadcast should be on PBS, right? Coaches and ADs should be paid like professors and be requested to teach PE classes, right?

Because college athletics is just a an amateur sporting event, not a business, right?

The concern is about competitive balance. An open market for talent will push bagman prices up...way up and give a lot of sizzle to the transfer market.

But now that we are here, lets have at it. Rip open the market, let's see how it works out. I happen to think it will kill fan interest in bottom 25% of FCS programs. Fans will become acutely aware they are wasting their time supporting a program that doesn't have the financial firepower. #CulltheFCSherd.

Enough out of me on this...I'll be quiet now.

 

[BlueDogs]

Just further ruins the game by creating greater disparities among teams and even among players. If they want to get paid, they can join a football farm system... which doesn’t exist because without school brand name recognition they would earn less than the value of their education and board. More money means more graft.

 

[Guapo]

Just further ruins the game by creating greater disparities among teams and even among players. If they want to get paid, they can join a football farm system... which doesn’t exist because without school brand name recognition they would earn less than the value of their education and board. More money means more graft.

What football farm system??

 

[whaler11]

The concern is about competitive balance. An open market for talent will push bagman prices up...way up and give a lot of sizzle to the transfer market.

But now that we are here, lets have at it. Rip open the market, let's see how it works out. I happen to think it will kill fan interest in bottom 25% of FCS programs. Fans will become acutely aware they are wasting their time supporting a program that doesn't have the financial firepower. #CulltheFCSherd.

I’m not sure the opposite won’t be true. Boosters love being insiders - the thrill of getting 50k to a recruit to commit is much cooler than paying them to plug your business.

Fans seems to be figuring out that outside of 15 programs you are wasting your time. Look at the stadiums they are painfully empty outside of the tradition laden bluebloods.

I guess the best argument against your post is this... the NCAA agrees with you and generally they are wrong.

Are there really that many small business people dying to feed cash to recruits? The shoe companies have been picking winners for a while...

 

[whaler11]

Just further ruins the game by creating greater disparities among teams and even among players. If they want to get paid, they can join a football farm system... which doesn’t exist because without school brand name recognition they would earn less than the value of their education and board. More money means more graft.

god i hope alabama and clemson and ohio state arent in the top four... EVERY year

 

[Palatine]

California is the world's largest outdoor insane asylum.

The proper way to work through these issues is to have a player bring suit and see if it is within the law. This can be done without the state staking out a position. If no player brings a suit, why butt in?

 

[Guapo]

I’m not sure the opposite won’t be true. Boosters love being insiders - the thrill of getting 50k to a recruit to commit is much cooler than paying them to plug your business.

Fans seems to be figuring out that outside of 15 programs you are wasting your time. Look at the stadiums they are painfully empty outside of the tradition laden bluebloods.

I guess the best argument against your post is this... the NCAA agrees with you and generally they are wrong.

Are there really that many small business people dying to feed cash to recruits? The shoe companies have been picking winners for a while...

god i hope alabama and clemson and ohio state arent in the top four... EVERY year

 

[Exit 4]

I’m not sure the opposite won’t be true. Boosters love being insiders - the thrill of getting 50k to a recruit to commit is much cooler than paying them to plug your business.

Fans seems to be figuring out that outside of 15 programs you are wasting your time. Look at the stadiums they are painfully empty outside of the tradition laden bluebloods.

I guess the best argument against your post is this... the NCAA agrees with you and generally they are wrong.

Are there really that many small business people dying to feed cash to recruits? The shoe companies have been picking winners for a while...

I have flipped. I'm all for paying the players. If it narrows the 130 FBS field - so be it. If it pushes UConn out, so be it. Get the cash flowing.

 

[noeynox]

California is the world's largest outdoor insane asylum.

The proper way to work through these issues is to have a player bring suit and see if it is within the law. This can be done without the state staking out a position. If no player brings a suit, why butt in?

Umm. This was the crux of Ed Obannon lawsuit. The NCAA settled that one remember?

 

[ScottVib]

If this gets someone to bring back the NCAA Football franchise.. I'll support it!

 

[Irishfan]

Despite the apocalyptic claims to the contrary, I don’t think this will lead to the NCAA dissolving; so there would still be oversight from (which I believe these states would allow).

To your second point, nothing about this bill involves the school paying players so I’m not even sure why you bring it up...?

The bill says that the players can get paid for their image. It doesn’t say that the school can’t pay them. Why should a car dealership be allowed to pay them, but the school not be allowed.

 

[Guapo]

The bill says that the players can get paid for their image. It doesn’t say that the school can’t pay them. Why should a car dealership be allowed to pay them, but the school not be allowed.

The bill is specifically written to allow “athletes to sell their image and likeness to outside bidders” (outside bidders=not the school).

In addition, this bill did not dissolve the NCAA so the school’s would still be subject to the NCAA’s rules and, I’m not if you’re aware or not, but the NCAA does not allow schools to pay players.

C’mon, you went to Notre Dame, you must be smarter than this.

 

[Irishfan]

The bill is specifically written to allow “athletes to sell their image and likeness to outside bidders” (outside bidders=not the school).

In addition, this bill did not dissolve the NCAA so the school’s would still be subject to the NCAA’s rules and, I’m not if you’re aware or not, but the NCAA does not allow schools to pay players.

C’mon, you went to Notre Dame, you must be smarter than this.

The NCAA does not allow boosters to pay players either. I think they are more concerned with the boosters paying the athletes than the school. The school already gives then tuition, room and board, and books. But if a booster can endow the coaching position at a school, why not endow payments to 40 scholarship positions. If the athletes can be paid, which other NCAA rules are you worried about.

 

[Guapo]

The NCAA does not allow boosters to pay players either. I think they are more concerned with the boosters paying the athletes than the school. The school already gives then tuition, room and board, and books. But if a booster can endow the coaching position at a school, why not endow payments to 40 scholarship positions. If the athletes can be paid, which other NCAA rules are you worried about.

Ok but these are all hypotheticals and not related to what is in the bill being discussed in this thread.

 

[Irishfan]

Ok but these are all hypotheticals and not related to what is in the bill being discussed in this thread.

Isn’t the bill being discussed in this thread involving the payments to players?

 

[Guapo]

Isn’t the bill being discussed in this thread involving the payments to players?

Not by schools

 

[Exit 4]

Not by schools

You see a wall on this subject, I see a screen door.

Doesn't really matter though. What matters is when we are pitching for another JUCO QB from Lackawanna this winter and we lose out to some Temple funny money; thats when it smarts. Whether its 1k, 3k, 5k or 50k, are we ready for the open market? AD David Benedict better has some faux endorsement deals ready to go.

The opaque market suppressed prices and say what you want - it did discourage many from doing any price discovery what so ever....

 

[Irishfan]

Not by schools

So instead of boosters giving money to the athletic departments, they set up booster clubs with the sole purpose to funnel money to the top recruits.

 

[Guapo]

You see a wall on this subject, I see a screen door.

Doesn't really matter though. What matters is when we are pitching for another JUCO QB from Lackawanna this winter and we lose out to some Temple funny money; thats when it smarts. Whether its 1k, 3k, 5k or 50k, are we ready for the open market? AD David Benedict better has some faux endorsement deals ready to go.

The opaque market suppressed prices and say what you want - it did discourage many from doing any price discovery what so ever....

So instead of boosters giving money to the athletic departments, they set up booster clubs with the sole purpose to funnel money to the top recruits.

I love that you guys just state these things as if it’s a forgone conclusion that this is what will happen.

There’s simply no way in knowing for sure.

 

[Exit 4]

I love that you guys just state these things as if it’s a forgone conclusion that this is what will happen.

There’s simply no way in knowing for sure.

Walks like a duck, talks like a duck...

 

[Irishfan]

I love that you guys just state these things as if it’s a forgone conclusion that this is what will happen.

There’s simply no way in knowing for sure.

What do you think will happen. If its OK to pay the players, boosters will pay them. Some pay them now, when is isn’t OK, why do you think payments to top recruits won’t explode once it is OK.

 

[noeynox]

What do you think will happen. If its OK to pay the players, boosters will pay them. Some pay them now, when is isn’t OK, why do you think payments to top recruits won’t explode once it is OK.

What's gonna happen is that the ncaa is going to have to come to some agreement to let players earn some money. This may come from signing autographs, appearing on billboards, etc. At the heart of this is the athletes that bring in money. Trevor Lawrence getting a full ride isn't being compensated equal to the value he brings vs a kid on a full ride for playing tennis.

 

[Guapo]

What do you think will happen. If its OK to pay the players, boosters will pay them. Some pay them now, when is isn’t OK, why do you think payments to top recruits won’t explode once it is OK.

I don’t know what will happen!

What I do know is you are taking something that is very nebulous and making hard and fast pronouncements about what the outcome will be.

All I can work with right now is the bill that has been passed.

If 2023 comes around and this bill is actually implemented, and everything else in college athletic stays the same, then the NCAA is still going to have vast control over how schools recruit and how money flows through programs.

So, yes, I think the scenarios that you and others have laid out are a bit hyperbolic

 

[Irishfan]

What's gonna happen is that the ncaa is going to have to come to some agreement to let players earn some money. This may come from signing autographs, appearing on billboards, etc. At the heart of this is the athletes that bring in money. Trevor Lawrence getting a full ride isn't being compensated equal to the value he brings vs a kid on a full ride for playing tennis.

Signing autographs? Just give them the money. Yes, the athletes bring in the money, and the expenses. There are very few profitable athletic departments. Should athletic departments who lose money, charge the athletes for contributing to the losses? Notre Dame sells out the stadium, and gets money from the NBC television contract, and the ACC. If some athlete decides to transfer, do you think it will decrease the revenue that ND football will generate? I don’t think it is the athletes that bring in the money, I think it’s the program. I buy tickets to the games, regardless of which players are playing. I bought tickets during the Holtz years, and I bought tickets during the Weis disaster. I’m not buying a ticket to see an individual player.

 

[Irishfan]

I don’t know what will happen!

What I do know is you are taking something that is very nebulous and making hard and fast pronouncements about what the outcome will be.

All I can work with right now is the bill that has been passed.

If 2023 comes around and this bill is actually implemented, and everything else in college athletic stays the same, then the NCAA is still going to have vast control over how schools recruit and how money flows through programs.

So, yes, I think the scenarios that you and others have laid out are a bit hyperbolic

Yes, the NCAA may still have control over how money flows through the system. But now, the NCAA will have no control on how money flows outside the system. Boosters will have free rein to pay a recruit or a player to get them to their school. Paying a player to transfer from one school to another ( after they prove to be top talent) will also become a common practice.

I think the scenarios that we have laid out are just the start of where this will go. There will be no need for boosters to contribute to the schools to get them to improve their facilities, now they can go directly to the athletes to pay them to attend.

 

[uconnbill]

This could be the demise of college sports as we know it.

Not a fan, especially since the I never went to college Lebron being behind it

 

[Exit 4]

Watch- there will be a push to standardize these new “sponsorship” contracts rather quickly. Rules on “signing bonuses,” “claw backs” and what happens when players transfer, quit, become academically ineligible etc, etc.