Senator Murphy’s Legislation on College Athletes

[MooseJaw]

Alabama wants the #1 QB in the country. Said recruit is able to see the kind of $ current top performing players make at 'bama thanks to oil money boosters for whom cost is no object. In the new environment where players can make money off their image and likeness, the top prep stars will almost certainly go to where they can play AND make the most money.
I'm not suggesting the boosters will force players on the school and I'm also not suggesting they pay the athletes while still in high school, but by virtue of supporting existing players, they will make it easier for their university to get the players they want by showing what the player could earn on the side at said school. BTW, I seriously doubt a school wouldn't admit a stud the coach wants just because they've made excessive money in high school. For the top basketball players, the sneaker companies will be there and possibly making deals.
Who decides what is excessive? If T Boone Pickens Ford wants to pay a freshman stud quarterback $50K for a TV commercial, who's to stop them? Free market, right?

I agree, when and if this happens I will no longer support the sport and search elsewhere for my entertainment.

 

[BobbyJ]

I agree with your point. But the reverse is also true. A major factor, and perhaps the major factor, in the estimated $15 billion in revenue that colleges earn are the players themselves. At present, players receive tuition, room & board, and that’s it.

Don't forget the unlimited Pudding Pops for snacks.

 

[CocoHusky]

Alabama wants the #1 QB in the country. Said recruit is able to see the kind of $ current top performing players make at 'bama thanks to oil money boosters for whom cost is no object. In the new environment where players can make money off their image and likeness, the top prep stars will almost certainly go to where they can play AND make the most money.
I'm not suggesting the boosters will force players on the school and I'm also not suggesting they pay the athletes while still in high school, but by virtue of supporting existing players, they will make it easier for their university to get the players they want by showing what the player could earn on the side at said school. BTW, I seriously doubt a school wouldn't admit a stud the coach wants just because they've made excessive money in high school. For the top basketball players, the sneaker companies will be there and possibly making deals.
Who decides what is excessive? If T Boone Pickens Ford wants to pay a freshman stud quarterback $50K for a TV commercial, who's to stop them? Free market, right?

Every university has a department call admissions. The best thing about working in and admissions department is you don't have to have a very good reason to reject an applicant. In the case where a University thinks that boosters have paid too much for an athlete the University can reject the applicant.
So let me flip your questions around. What booster is going to pay $50K for a kid that's not going to be admitted to their favorite university. For already enrolled students free market and public disclosure could work much better than the current system of under the table payments like we seen in movies like Blue Chips. We are also only talking about two sports Men's basketball and Football.

 

[CocoHusky]

I agree, when and if this happens I will no longer support the sport and search elsewhere for my entertainment.

It is already happening don't delay your search.

 

[j66kicker]

In the case where a University thinks that boosters have paid too much for an athlete the University can reject the applicant.
So let me flip your questions around. What booster is going to pay $50K for a kid that's not going to be admitted to their favorite university. For already enrolled students free market and public disclosure could work much better than the current system of under the table payments like we seen in movies like Blue Chips. We are also only talking about two sports Men's basketball and Football.

What about the "already-enrolled" students who were promised the $50K "contract" before they enrolled, to be awarded after they're in place?

BTW for the top high-end MBB and football players it's already a lot more than $50K

 

[BobbyJ]

Every university has a department call admissions. The best thing about working in and admissions department is you don't have to have a very good reason to reject an applicant. In the case where a University thinks that boosters have paid too much for an athlete the University can reject the applicant.
So let me flip your questions around. What booster is going to pay $50K for a kid that's not going to be admitted to their favorite university. For already enrolled students free market and public disclosure could work much better than the current system of under the table payments like we seen in movies like Blue Chips. We are also only talking about two sports Men's basketball and Football.

Absolutely, gotta get the right players. Sounds like the coach, boosters, and admissions will have to get back to collaborating on "buying the groceries". Like they did back in the 50s, 60s, and 70s before the NCAA started gumming up the works with all those new rules.

 

[CocoHusky]

What about the "already-enrolled" students who were promised the $50K "contract" before they enrolled, to be awarded after they're in place?

BTW for the top high-end MBB and football players it's already a lot more than $50K

Him you should kick out of school right away! Anyone who would operate on a $50K promise and not get the money up front doesn't have much potential=not college material.

 

[jaundicedeye]

I believe the top schools will only prosper from this legislation for the simple reason that the handful of top HS athletes like Paige, will have an even greater incentive to attend “high profile” universities where their print & media exposure will be significantly greater.

Agree. Without couching it I would more plainly say high profile schools would appeal to the recruit by literally showing them their proposed marketing plan to get them exposure.

 

[Tonyc]

Why stop in college include high school too. If an athlete is good enough they can go to any hs they choose if the money is right Same thing for AAU ball and other travel teams. lol

 

[Fairfield_1st]

Every university has a department call admissions. The best thing about working in and admissions department is you don't have to have a very good reason to reject an applicant. In the case where a University thinks that boosters have paid too much for an athlete the University can reject the applicant.
So let me flip your questions around. What booster is going to pay $50K for a kid that's not going to be admitted to their favorite university. For already enrolled students free market and public disclosure could work much better than the current system of under the table payments like we seen in movies like Blue Chips. We are also only talking about two sports Men's basketball and Football.

In my suggestion, it's the lure of booster money that convinces the student to attend. Since it can be done out in the open, there will be no need to pay the student athlete until they are accepted and enrolled.
Out in the open and full disclosure just means a school doesn't have to worry anymore.

 

[Jingo]

I agree, when and if this happens I will no longer support the sport and search elsewhere for my entertainment.

I'm with you Moose .. and it's why I no longer follow pro sports, nor mens' college basketball and football .. i m perfectly content following womens' college hoops [which my daughters played] and boys and girls high school sports .. I feel that TV [money] has caused a lot of trouble...

 

[FanHam]

To not be in favor of this is to be absurd.

How many college athletes with promising professional aspirations had their career hijacked by an injury or other such setback, and were thus unable to realize their life's financial potential?

How much of a "learning institution's" budget is funded by the sweat of athletes?

I don't want to drop the "S" word about this, but I think you know where I'm coming from...

 

[Fairfield_1st]

To not be in favor of this is to be absurd.

How many college athletes with promising professional aspirations had their career hijacked by an injury or other such setback, and were thus unable to realize their life's financial potential?

How much of a "learning institution's" budget is funded by the sweat of athletes?

I don't want to drop the "S" word about this, but I think you know where I'm coming from...

Speaking for myself, it's not that I'm not in favor of it, but how does it get enacted and subsequently not abused by those with money? For you to label something as absurd because they don't see an issue the same way as you is also absurd.
All of them are student athletes. They are given a full education in trade for playing a sport. If the student athlete gets injured, the scholarships are almost always, if not always, continued. The student athlete still has the opportunity to get a degree and make the most of their life. Just because they can't play a given sport anymore doesn't mean they can't fulfill their life's potential. How many CEOs played pro sports? To be fair, most pro basketball players do not do it in the NBA. I don't know how much they make overseas, but it's not NBA money.
The S word is just silly. It's a mutually beneficial arrangement. In many instances the student athlete is given an opportunity that they may not have gotten based off their high school academics. Nobody is being forced to go to college, it is a choice.

 

[Shenandoah]

So, will the athletes now be required to pick up the tab for their education, instead of receiving a multiple 10's of thousand dollar education in exchange for engaging in their chosen sport? IMHO, this is just another bad idea...

 

[willtalk]

The cry of those mean colleges taking advantage of its players is absurd. No one would even go to see those games if they were not associated with their respective colleges. You can gage the value of those teams by comparing them to the lower professional leagues. Players who play for any team other than the top professional teams get paid very little id anything at all. Even the top professional league except fot baseball popularity was fueled by the popularity of college games.

It is not the quality of the team that gives the college game value. Most simi pro teams are better. Rather it is the market value of the alumni that dictates TV value. Which is why ND was still on a national TV network each week even when the team was not that good. Just observe how many peope pay to see simi pro teams in basketball. National TV has ruined the market value for local teams.

If players start getting paid, then teams will just become simi pro teams using the schools facilities. The actual conection to the schools and the support it garners will be lost. You can see this in many professional teams over seas that are affilliated with colleges. They need to be financed by cities of corporations.
.

 

[oldude]

Speaking for myself, it's not that I'm not in favor of it, but how does it get enacted and subsequently not abused by those with money? For you to label something as absurd because they don't see an issue the same way as you is also absurd.
All of them are student athletes. They are given a full education in trade for playing a sport. If the student athlete gets injured, the scholarships are almost always, if not always, continued. The student athlete still has the opportunity to get a degree and make the most of their life. Just because they can't play a given sport anymore doesn't mean they can't fulfill their life's potential. How many CEOs played pro sports? To be fair, most pro basketball players do not do it in the NBA. I don't know how much they make overseas, but it's not NBA money.
The S word is just silly. It's a mutually beneficial arrangement. In many instances the student athlete is given an opportunity that they may not have gotten based off their high school academics. Nobody is being forced to go to college, it is a choice.

The points you raise are valid, and have been argued by the proponents of the current system for many years. But the current system is broken. At many big time schools the “student” part of the student-athlete experience has been subjugated to a year round focus on football or basketball.

At P-5 schools in particular, football & basketball generate over $15 billion in direct revenue from ticket sales, broadcast revenue & merchandise sales, and that’s before including substantial support from alumni contributions to schools that finance everything from athletic scholarships and coach’s salaries to upgraded facilities.

The massive business of college sports is built on the foundation of the athletes themselves and the one sided bargain which favors the institutions that make millions off of their labor. This would not be tolerated in any other business in America. IMO, it is time for this business to change.

 

[Fairfield_1st]

The massive business of college sports is built on the foundation of the athletes themselves and the one sided bargain which favors the institutions that make millions off of their labor. This would not be tolerated in any other business in America. IMO, it is time for this business to change.

I agree with your point that it is broken and that schools must do a better job on the academic experience. But like most academic experiences, some of that is on the student as well. You get out what you put in. Emeka is an example of a driven student who got out of college what he put into it.

I do disagree with the statement quoted above. Every big business makes millions off the backs of their laborers. Small businesses also make money off the backs of their laborers. The differences across the businesses is what the laborers get paid. At McDonald's or a mom and pop shop it may be minimum wage. In pro sports it's much higher. In the case of college sports, they get a free education and a diploma that also carries additional earnings vs a high school grad. Right now 4 years at UConn for in state with no aid is over $120K.

 

[oldude]

I agree with your point that it is broken and that schools must do a better job on the academic experience. But like most academic experiences, some of that is on the student as well. You get out what you put in. Emeka is an example of a driven student who got out of college what he put into it.

I do disagree with the statement quoted above. Every big business makes millions off the backs of their laborers. Small businesses also make money off the backs of their laborers. The differences across the businesses is what the laborers get paid. At McDonald's or a mom and pop shop it may be minimum wage. In pro sports it's much higher. In the case of college sports, they get a free education and a diploma that also carries additional earnings vs a high school grad. Right now 4 years at UConn for in state with no aid is over $120K.

The other businesses you reference are all subject to collective bargaining laws. The NCAA is not. The other obvious point is that employees in any of these businesses can seek employment, and higher compensation elsewhere. NCAA athletes are basically subject to the same rules at every school in the country.

In her 2014 decision in the Ed Obannon case, in which EA Sports paid licensing fees to the NCAA for the rights to use former players “likenesses” in their video games, without compensation to these now ex-college athletes, Judge Wilkens ruled that the NCAA was engaged in “an unreasonable restraint of trade in violation of antitrust laws.”

 

[freshler40]

I believe the top schools will only prosper from this legislation for the simple reason that the handful of top HS athletes like Paige, will have an even greater incentive to attend “high profile” universities where their print & media exposure will be significantly greater.

If we believe in free markets and currently do allow anybody with a lemonade stand to make money, this change is in our future. Yes, a scholarship counts and should but beyond that for the top athletes, who in major sports only play a year or two, such rewards to other student won't account for much. Coaches make tons of money now in Div 1 top sports. How to allocate the enormous TV pool fairly will be a challenge. Most schools lose money on paper due to the funny allocation of scholarship moneys and other operating costs. The fans/taxpayers are duped into viewing such losses as real. A normal business could have closed years ago.

Consolidation of top players in top colligate sports has been going on for a long time and just continues. The rich get richer.

 

[Fairfield_1st]

The other businesses you reference are all subject to collective bargaining laws. The NCAA is not. The other obvious point is that employees in any of these businesses can seek employment, and higher compensation elsewhere. NCAA athletes are basically subject to the same rules at every school in the country.

Nobody is making them go to a college. It is in their best interest if they have professional aspirations given the quality of play and visibility, but they don't have to go. LaMelo Ball left high school before his junior year and played professionally in Lithuania. I assume there are other options as well. They have other options.

 

[oldude]

Nobody is making them go to a college. It is in their best interest if they have professional aspirations given the quality of play and visibility, but they don't have to go. LaMelo Ball left high school before his junior year and played professionally in Lithuania. I assume there are other options as well. They have other options.

We all have options. Players like Lebron James, who skip college and go directly to the pros, are exceedingly rare. In college football, such players don’t even exist. This has nothing to do with individual choice. It is all about a system that is set up to exploit athletes so that colleges, tv networks and other entities can make millions of dollars. There is something hypocritical and frankly, un-American about such a system.

As someone pointed out, we live in a free market system. The NCAA has made its case for special protection all the way to the Supreme Court, and they have lost. Whether anyone likes it or not, the day when college athletes can earn money off their name, image or likeness is coming.

I do agree that navigating this brave new world will be like traversing a minefield. There will be abuses. But the courts have made it clear to the NCAA that they had better figure it out.

 

[CocoHusky]

Nobody is making them go to a college. It is in their best interest if they have professional aspirations given the quality of play and visibility, but they don't have to go. LaMelo Ball left high school before his junior year and played professionally in Lithuania. I assume there are other options as well. They have other options.

The NBA and the NFL are certainly not making them go to college but it is limiting their options by imposing draft eligible restrictions such as age. Contrast that with MLB where a player can be drafted right out of high school and DOES NOT lose the option of playing NCAA baseball.

 

[Sky ball]

What it means is the schools with the ability to provide the highest profile to a student-athlete will get first dibs on the top talent. The more marketing and exposure a school can offer, the more money making potential for a prospective recruit. It would just be one more thing to add to the overall package a school could offer. A coach could say if you come to our university, we'll offer you the best coaching, training, TV exposure, marketing, biggest potential to make money, and way way down on the list in small letters a top notch education. There would of course be corruption with such an arrangement, but we'll put that aside for a moment. Imagine what this would do for the top football schools like Ohio State or Alabama? I think the impact is less in basketball because teams are much smaller, the talent is less specialized and is forced to disperse across many schools. It would help steer the top shelf talent to the schools with the largest media footprints ultimately.

"Paige don't go to UConn and make a paltry 500K a year. Here at Texas we can get you to 5 mil a year." Said a Texas Booster.

 

[CocoHusky]

We all have options. Players like Lebron James, who skip college and go directly to the pros, are exceedingly rare. In college football, such players don’t even exist. This has nothing to do with individual choice. It is all about a system that is set up to exploit athletes so that colleges, tv networks and other entities can make millions of dollars. There is something hypocritical and frankly, un-American about such a system.

As someone pointed out, we live in a free market system. The NCAA has made its case for special protection all the way to the Supreme Court, and they have lost. Whether anyone likes it or not, the day when college athletes can earn money off their name, image or likeness is coming.

I do agree that navigating this brave new world will be like traversing a minefield. There will be abuses. But the courts have made it clear to the NCAA that they had better figure it out.

Since 2006 NBA Players have not been allow to go from HS straight to NBA- Agree that this is entirely Un-American.

 

[oldude]

"Paige don't go to UConn and make a paltry 500K a year. Here at Texas we can get you to 5 mil a year." Said a Texas Booster.

That might be true in football, but not in WBB.