SCOTUS rules against NCAA | Page 5 | The Boneyard

SCOTUS rules against NCAA

Joined
Jun 9, 2017
Messages
6,483
Reaction Score
25,808
Break it down please. How have the schools become fabulously wealthy off of this?

It's the coaches who are creating the totally distorted reality between players compensation and coaching compensation.

Schools are not a “for profit” business in the same ways our hospitals and health care facilities are not “for profit.” Look at president’s and administrative salaries at these schools - and their operating budgets, public support and donations; not to mention their public profiles. I’m not saying these are necessarily bad things - it shows the inherent value of athletics.

Do you think UConn is what it is today without the basketball programs?
 

HuskyHawk

The triumphant return of the Blues Brothers.
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
31,860
Reaction Score
81,477
Schools are not a “for profit” business in the same ways our hospitals and health care facilities are not “for profit.” Look at president’s and administrative salaries at these schools - and their operating budgets, public support and donations; not to mention their public profiles. I’m not saying these are necessarily bad things - it shows the inherent value of athletics.

Do you think UConn is what it is today without the basketball programs?

It depends on whether other schools have basketball programs. You have sports teams because it attracts some students. Some want that experience. Others want a really amazing gym on campus...so you build one. Others want lots of good food options, so you add that. Others want dorms with suites rather than communal bathrooms, so you build that. These schools spend billions on things that are outside of the educational experience, so they can attract more applications and as that boosts their competitive ranking and prestige, then they can charge more. It's a cycle that drives up cost.

But very few schools make any money off athletics. Most of the P5 lose money. The idea that there is some profit that these players generate and which they aren't earning, that's a myth. Yes the coaches are well paid. Because the coaches are there longer than the players, recruit the players so have many times the impact on the program that any player could. I would guess that 99.5% of all D1 scholarship athletes are overcompensated.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2017
Messages
6,483
Reaction Score
25,808
It depends on whether other schools have basketball programs. You have sports teams because it attracts some students. Some want that experience. Others want a really amazing gym on campus...so you build one. Others want lots of good food options, so you add that. Others want dorms with suites rather than communal bathrooms, so you build that. These schools spend billions on things that are outside of the educational experience, so they can attract more applications and as that boosts their competitive ranking and prestige, then they can charge more. It's a cycle that drives up cost.

But very few schools make any money off athletics. Most of the P5 lose money. The idea that there is some profit that these players generate and which they aren't earning, that's a myth. Yes the coaches are well paid. Because the coaches are there longer than the players, recruit the players so have many times the impact on the program that any player could. I would guess that 99.5% of all D1 scholarship athletes are overcompensated.

I get that, I would caution there’s some shady accounting that goes into the “schools don’t make money on athletics” thought. Besides the point, though because I’m not really advocating for schools to pay players directly, but the athletes should 1000% be able to leverage their names for endorsements etc.
 

HuskyHawk

The triumphant return of the Blues Brothers.
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
31,860
Reaction Score
81,477
I get that, I would caution there’s some shady accounting that goes into the “schools don’t make money on athletics” thought. Besides the point, though because I’m not really advocating for schools to pay players directly, but the athletes should 1000% be able to leverage their names for endorsements etc.
I agree on NIL, with some rules. The risk there is boosters. Come play QB at UGA and we will pay you $40k to be the face of the local BBQ chain in our commercials. Needs to occur post recruitment. But the current rules are stupid, especially for those athletes that really created a brand on their own, like the LSU gymnast (Livvy Dunne, 1.1M followers on Insta, and it isn't because she's at LSU) and many years ago, Brian Bosworth at OU. YouTube, Instagram and TikTok have truly changed the landscape and they should all be able to monetize those platforms. I don't see how that impacts recruiting.
 

Online statistics

Members online
557
Guests online
3,479
Total visitors
4,036

Forum statistics

Threads
155,775
Messages
4,031,184
Members
9,864
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom