How would you regulate paying college athletes?



Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
238
Likes
495
I haven’t got too deep into the CA bill, but my concern would be that the schools with the biggest boosters would get the best talent and it would take away the parity that still exists. Would that even matter? Or do schools like Kentucky and Duke get pretty much the same players. Would it not affect them but affect the 5-25 schools more? Would allowing kids to get paid for likeness essentially do the same thing as it would make the kids who go to the biggest brands get paid the most? Would giving 17-18 year olds a ton of cash be a good idea or would they all end up in a strip club with a trash bag full of dollar bills. I probably would have.

I’m curious as to what approaches have been seriously discussed.

My approach would be to pay players a sum that would allow them to be ok not having a job for the year. Maybe 4K ish a semester and 5k ish in the summer so they can focus on their sport. I’d also probably give the family a 2000 expense account per season to see their kid play.

The catch would be that if you elected to pay for one sport, you would have to pay across your entire athletic department without dropping sports. So all athletes would have the time to dedicate to their craft, not have garbage-bag-full-of-bill money but enough to not be hungry huskies, and it would keep a level playing field between schools so there isn’t a massive concentration of college sports money into a few schools in big media or booster markets.

Am I way off? What does a proposal look like that will keep a good product for a broad base of fans and get the NCAA out of the tricky game of applying a BS set of rules across an incredibly wide range of scenarios.

Very curious to see what folks have to say.
 

polycom

I heard a beep, who just joined?
Joined
Nov 14, 2014
Messages
6,394
Likes
8,363
Let schools who can’t afford it not compete. The system will fall apart, those schools will become like minor leagues. Fans who love the schools and not the players will stop watching. Then the cycle will start over again
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2016
Messages
2,674
Likes
2,456
If they pay the athletes, tax the money as income earned and let them use that money earned to pay for college like everyone else does. Also, a cap on how much can be paid per year. Though I disagree with paying players. If we go down that route, ya, I think the system will fall apart.
 
Joined
May 27, 2014
Messages
2,061
Likes
4,714
If they pay the athletes, tax the money as income earned and let them use that money earned to pay for college like everyone else does. Also, a cap on how much can be paid per year. Though I disagree with paying players. If we go down that route, ya, I think the system will fall apart.
I’m all for paying players in theory but this is a great point. I think people think student-athletes would be making millions in college. In reality, you’d be lucky to break even with the cost of tuition in just one year of college.
 
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
80
Likes
236
A full ride to a decent school is $35k and up a year not including books, tutors and other perks of being a student athlete that aren't afforded to the general student body. Sounds like they are already receiving some form of compensation. They should get a spending allowance just because they are not permitted to have jobs because of fraud fears but anything above that makes them true professionals and will destroy amateur sports forever, just look at what it has done to the Olympics which I care very little for now a days.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
1,794
Likes
2,173
If they pay the athletes, tax the money as income earned and let them use that money earned to pay for college like everyone else does. Also, a cap on how much can be paid per year. Though I disagree with paying players. If we go down that route, ya, I think the system will fall apart.
The system WILL fall apart? Big name schools are cheating left and right currently, the system has already fallen.
 

the Q

Thanos 2020: he did nothing wrong
Joined
Mar 28, 2017
Messages
4,475
Likes
3,341
I have no issue with them using their own name and likeness from private entities (I.e. the UCF kicker with a YouTube channel or even some local car company doing an endorsement from their heisman level QB) but I’m in favor of keeping the schools out of it.

First of all, it’s a title ix nightmare because no one had the forethought to see that football is it’s own beast.

Second, only a small handful of schools could legally pay the players anyway.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
238
Likes
495
The system WILL fall apart? Big name schools are cheating left and right currently, the system has already fallen.
I think the system is complicated and not totally clean, but the TV product is pretty good and it keeps people from a hundred + schools engaged. The system has more good than bad currently from my perspective.

Guys like Chris Murphy are big supporters of paying students and I've never really got how that would make the product better.
 

CL82

July 1, 2020 - Let the countdown begin!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
32,465
Likes
52,983
I have no issue with them using their own name and likeness from private entities (I.e. the UCF kicker with a YouTube channel or even some local car company doing an endorsement from their heisman level QB) but I’m in favor of keeping the schools out of it.

First of all, it’s a title ix nightmare because no one had the forethought to see that football is it’s own beast.

Second, only a small handful of schools could legally pay the players anyway.
I agree in theory, but it will take all of a second or two for people to figure out how to game this. Another poster gave the example of the local car dealer/booster paying kids for their image to advertise his dealership. It’s extraordinarily problematic. Instead give kids a small living expense stipend and leave it at that.
 

the Q

Thanos 2020: he did nothing wrong
Joined
Mar 28, 2017
Messages
4,475
Likes
3,341
I agree in theory, but it will take all of a second or two for people to figure out how to game this. Another poster gave the example of the local car dealer/booster paying kids for their image to advertise his dealership. It’s extraordinarily problematic. Instead give kids a small living expense stipend and leave it at that.
It may be problematic. But it’s he best way I can figure to let players profit from their likeness.

Also, freaking bring back ncaa football and basketball video games and pay the players a small amount. That’s from a private entity so I’m not sure it has the same title ix issues.

Oh, and make multiple covers so more players can get paid as a cover athlete. Think regionally.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
25,753
Likes
17,190
I have no issue with them using their own name and likeness from private entities (I.e. the UCF kicker with a YouTube channel or even some local car company doing an endorsement from their heisman level QB) but I’m in favor of keeping the schools out of it.

First of all, it’s a title ix nightmare because no one had the forethought to see that football is it’s own beast.

Second, only a small handful of schools could legally pay the players anyway.
While I agree with you about endorsements, this surely means that the "clubs" with the wackiest boosters will dominate the landscape. All it takes is one bazillionaire per school. It's going to get silly. It's going to become T. Boone Pickens IV vs. the new Jeffrey Epstein.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
25,753
Likes
17,190
I agree in theory, but it will take all of a second or two for people to figure out how to game this. Another poster gave the example of the local car dealer/booster paying kids for their image to advertise his dealership. It’s extraordinarily problematic. Instead give kids a small living expense stipend and leave it at that.
This was already approved, I thought. Schools are already paying players $5-6k in addition to all their fees.

By the way, this has backfired spectacularly on a couple of schools I know of. The NCAA only allows schools to reimburse athletes up to the amount of posted living expenses, based on local costs, travel, utilities, etc. Schools started posting those $5-6k estimates on their websites, as required. These were used by grad student unions to argue for higher stipends. It has worked successfully at a couple of places I know. A clear example of policy for athletes helping students. Amazing. And yet, that doesn't mean the pot of money for these payouts ever increased. Someone is paying for this, that's for sure. It amazes me that the parents of undergrads never wise up to this.
 

the Q

Thanos 2020: he did nothing wrong
Joined
Mar 28, 2017
Messages
4,475
Likes
3,341
This was already approved, I thought. Schools are already paying players $5-6k in addition to all their fees.

By the way, this has backfired spectacularly on a couple of schools I know of. The NCAA only allows schools to reimburse athletes up to the amount of posted living expenses, based on local costs, travel, utilities, etc. Schools started posting those $5-6k estimates on their websites, as required. These were used by grad student unions to argue for higher stipends. It has worked successfully at a couple of places I know. A clear example of policy for athletes helping students. Amazing. And yet, that doesn't mean the pot of money for these payouts ever increased. Someone is paying for this, that's for sure. It amazes me that the parents of undergrads never wise up to this.
I’m not even against the schools getting a % of the action from these private endorsements (since they’re using their status a school member to get it)...similar to the grant funding situation at universities.

That could help defray some of those other costs to athletes that are paid by normal students
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
25,753
Likes
17,190
I’m not even against the schools getting a % of the action from these private endorsements (since they’re using their status a school member to get it)...similar to the grant funding situation at universities.

That could help defray some of those other costs to athletes that are paid by normal students
While I get your argument, especially about players using their school's status (let's face it, on the open market, the money for a minor league sports league that plays bball at the level of the NCAA would be significantly less) but nothing stops the boosters from contributing to these sports programs outright. They seem to reserve the money for paying players instead.

I get it but legally there is no way you could garnish the endorsement earnings even if the NCAA decrees it. Imagine a player refuses to fork over the money. What could they do? Ban him?
 

the Q

Thanos 2020: he did nothing wrong
Joined
Mar 28, 2017
Messages
4,475
Likes
3,341
While I get your argument, especially about players using their school's status (let's face it, on the open market, the money for a minor league sports league that plays bball at the level of the NCAA would be significantly less) but nothing stops the boosters from contributing to these sports programs outright. They seem to reserve the money for paying players instead.

I get it but legally there is no way you could garnish the endorsement earnings even if the NCAA decrees it. Imagine a player refuses to fork over the money. What could they do? Ban him?
They’d have to have a royalty agreement with the university. Maybe it’s language in the scholarship itself.
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2016
Messages
1,144
Likes
3,020
Every school has some rich alumni. Let them run wild if they want. Or just run it like aau, with the schools sponsored by Nike, adidas and under armour circuits and a tournament at the end and the winners get a huge pot of the tournament money. Ehhh I don’t know, that is probably stupid but it’s probably time to brainstorm and really go through some unique ideas because the current system is already screwed.

Also, it would be very sad if non-revenue sports got eliminated from colleges...everything should be done to keep them but non revenue sports should really not be traveling so far for regular season games/matches/meets. They should all be grouped regionally
 

CL82

July 1, 2020 - Let the countdown begin!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
32,465
Likes
52,983
It may be problematic. But it’s he best way I can figure to let players profit from their likeness.

Also, freaking bring back ncaa football and basketball video games and pay the players a small amount. That’s from a private entity so I’m not sure it has the same title ix issues.
Paying players for their likeness is a slippery slope that won't end well for college athletics. That's the point.

Agree 100% on NCAA football though. Distribute the money to the schools to use to pay for stipends. Every player gets the money equally.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 26, 2018
Messages
480
Likes
643
the Fair Pay Act contemplates NIL (name image likeness) endorsements from private 3rd parties. the money would have to be put into a trust only accessible after the athlete leaves school or graduates. otherwise giant state schools like UK with all their boosters would guarantee the name and face of every 5* recruit on a local car dealership (luxury SUV included) and laundromat. the athletes would be rolling through LexVegas making it rain.

for this reason the endorsements should be tied in some way to academics/athletics/the university. but maybe that just means Oregon gives every 5* recruit a nike shoe deal? idk. either way small private schools (like those in the big east) would become obsolete.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
2,184
Likes
2,619
Paying players for their likeness is a slippery slope that won't end well for college athletics. That's the point.

Agree 100% on NCAA football though. Dispute the money to the schools to use to pay for stipends. Every player gets the money equally.
People assert, with no evidence, that "paying players for their likeness is a slippery slope that wont end well for college athletics"

But when I read it I see

"freeing slaves is a slippery slope that won't end well for plantation economics"
"women voting is a slippery slope that won't end well for democracy"
"union organizing is a slippery slope that won't end well for the economy"
"blacks voting is a slippery slope that won't end well for democracy"
"women sports is a slippery slope that won't end well for college athletics"


And every other unfounded assertion that anyone protecting a discriminatory and unjust status quo has ever used.

How about this - not paying people a fair market wage for their labor is unnacceptable. Start there and understand that literally any other outcome is a more just and fair one. Slippery slope fear mongers be damned.
 

CL82

July 1, 2020 - Let the countdown begin!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
32,465
Likes
52,983
People assert, with no evidence, that "paying players for their likeness is a slippery slope that wont end well for college athletics"

But when I read it I see

"freeing slaves is a slippery slope that won't end well for plantation economics"
"women voting is a slippery slope that won't end well for democracy"
"union organizing is a slippery slope that won't end well for the economy"
"blacks voting is a slippery slope that won't end well for democracy"
"women sports is a slippery slope that won't end well for college athletics"


And every other unfounded assertion that anyone protecting a discriminatory and unjust status quo has ever used.

How about this - not paying people a fair market wage for their labor is unnacceptable. Start there and understand that literally any other outcome is a more just and fair one. Slippery slope fear mongers be damned.
Yeah, I only skimmed this but realized in short order it was batshit crazy.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
2,184
Likes
2,619
Yeah, I only skimmed this but realized in short order it was batshit crazy. See if you can figure out why it is.
Not engaging on the point?

I have yet to see a single piece of evidence in years of exactly WHY paying players would "be a slippery slope that won't end well for college athletics" other than assertions of this as fact.

Like every other matter of injustice, it comes down to a central question : Do you prefer order, or do you prefer justice.

If you prefer order, you will go to any lengths or assertion to defend the current status quo. In this case it is people scaremongering and nostalgically rueing the NCAA as they knew it.

If you prefer justice, you understand that regardless of the unpleasantness of change, to promote a more just environment change is necessary, and to figure out how to best do that.

You can be dismissive if you want, but it doesn't change the truth of the matter. College athletes are currently exploited. If there is no change, that exploitation will continue. So change is absolutely necessary.

Oh, and if for any reason you prefer the current status quo, you are ok with the exploitation of the athletes. Its central to your position.
 

polycom

I heard a beep, who just joined?
Joined
Nov 14, 2014
Messages
6,394
Likes
8,363
It's crazy that people who are typically free market solves things are the same people who are saying let's continue to stop the free market...Maybe it's not about the free market.
 
Top