Link: S. Carolina to consider Fair Pay For Pay to play type bill (ESPN Article)

Snuffy Smith

All-American
Sep 12, 2012
3,539
641
162
Huntsville, AL
NCAA can ban CA schools, but the law is not unconstitutional. The NCAA is not required for athletics. CA is big enough to do their own sports thing if they wish.
So Cal, USC, UCLA & Stamford can compete for the California State Collegiate Championship atrophy!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Snuffy Smith

All-American
Sep 12, 2012
3,539
641
162
Huntsville, AL
California is trying to say that the NCAA can’t ban the schools because it would be a violation of the antitrust laws. If that ends up being the case what they CAN do is just slap anyone who receives compensation with suspension- just following today’s rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Sometimes, when civil rights are at stake, the government has to step in. I hate that it is necessary, but human beings take advantage of other human beings.
First, I do want to clarify I bear you no ill will. Just a discussion, and I think it's important to address the issues. I personally feel like a misinformation campaign has been waged (not by you) and similar to the current political climate, only one side is really allowed. For instance, if we take a divisive issue in politics, even if people are nearly evenly split, one side of the issue is often swiftly condemned and shouted down. Case in point, Tim Tebow comes out publicly against this and he's publicly attacked. So, we're lead to believe that the athletes feel a particular way, but really because only one opinion is tolerated.

Tim Tebow by the way acted in accordance with his views. He stayed in college an additional year when he could have easily left for the NFL. He clearly valued his time in college and valued what it provided. So when he states his opinion he is being genuine, he had a choice and he made it. There are very many college players who make that choice every single year by the way. These are all people who are not violated in anyway, people who can declare themselves for the NFL or stay in college, and there's a considerable amount that stay in college.

I find it ironic that going to college could be viewed as a violation of civil rights. I could only dream of being a scholarship athlete in college. Heck, when I was young I could only dream of a college education at all. If only I could have had my civil rights violated in such a manner, when I was busy struggling and working minimum wage, worrying about a place to live and how to put food in my mouth.

I say that, but let me be clear. I wish semi-pro football was more viable. I wish we could rid ourselves of the Leonard Fournettes and be left with the Tim Tebows of the world. College football doesn't need people like that anyway, some of my favorite players had no pro careers to speak of. We don't need them, but there are many, many players that need college football and one of the best kept secrets is how much has been provided on their behalf.

If you look at athletic department revenue, as I have, and poured over it year after year you start to see where the money comes from. Millions, sometimes well into the tens of millions are donated to athletic departments, sometimes specifically to college football. This might lead to better practice facilities, better equipment, state of the art amenities, but sometimes it goes just to keep the lights on. There are still shortfalls though, and and these are often met one way or the other by the government or the college (which is basically diverting government dollars). It's not uncommon to see an athletic department subsidized in this manner to the tune of 40 million dollars annually.

One reason the UAB football program thing was such a big deal, is it, like Tebow, broke the narrative. If these players are being violated and taken advantage of, how is it that their football program could be losing millions a year? I mean it's basically slave labor right, they're abused, downtrodden, and part of some giant money making machine, but... that big evil machine is actually spending more on the athletes than they take in? That doesn't fit the narrative does it? We can't have that. So we get public donations, and we get the city and the like writing even bigger checks, to basically make this go away. It does not change the basic fact that many college football programs lose money and people give them money to keep them afloat.

This gets us to breaking the amateur model and what the consequence of that would be. Once you basically say ok these guys are compensated professionals, what happens to the government dollars, to the public donations? Are people going to keep that up? Why would they, these are now compensated professionals. Why would they be entitled to government subsidies and the like? The truth of the matter is that for most college football players, what they get now is the best deal they could possibly get. We've seen the financial struggles of semi-professional football, and even then most college football players aren't at that level! Their earnings potential in a free market are very low.

What we are really discussing is breaking the entire model, risk bringing the entire thing crumbling down just to serve a few high profile athletes. Like I said before though, if only a semi-pro league was viable, I'd be more than happy to rid college football of people whose only mindset is how much money they can make, that don't value the education, that don't value the great things about college sports. Leave us with the Tebows and we'll be fine, but don't blow the whole thing up because a few people have to wait a couple years for their payday...
 
Last edited:

bamacon

Hall of Fame
Apr 11, 2008
17,179
4,352
187
College Football's Mecca, Tuscaloosa
I could see a “likeness” account being set up for the video game $ that the players generate. They can access it when their amateur status concludes. Paying them outright is outrageous and will kill the golden goose which I think is the primary motivation for this. It’s a poison pill and NOT anything truly aimed at “helping” the poor and exploited players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

JessN

Administrator & Editor-in-Chief
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
6,269
3,827
432
If you are going to pay them, then you can’t control the flow of the payments. They aren’t minors.

The best solve is to open up the NFL to 18 year olds. If their talent allows them to get paid, then let the NFL pay them. Otherwise, they can play college ball until they are ready. Make a players commitment expire on January 31st each year. If the player falls behind 15+ hours in school they become ineligible to play until they are caught up

When their annual scholarship expires on January 31st they can move to another school or turn pro.

They can sign a new scholarship early (before deadline)

Force the NFL to build a minor league system.

And make it illegal for colleges to sell anything with a player’s likeness, name, or quotes.
Couple of things, one of which I highlighted...

1) The NFL would solve everything if it opened a D-league. They don't want to do that, because they've (correctly) noted the colleges are spending the money to do it for them, and there's an interplay between the NFL, colleges and the draft (which is now almost its own animal) that works on all levels for all involved.

2) In regards to selling things with a player's likeness, whatever: Unless the rule has changed recently, schools can't do that (and can't license it) if the players have eligibility remaining. All those 13 jerseys you see for sale? I don't believe you'll see one at a UA-certified gameday shop with "Tagovailoa" on the back. It will be a generic 13. Also, in Daniel Moore's print of Shaun Alexander running wild in OT in the Swamp in 1999, they had to put Chris Samuels in the painting in place of Shawn Draper (who actually threw the block) because Draper had eligibility left. When Alabama markets something that has Tua in it now, it might be a marketing piece (a flier, an ad) but it won't be something for consumption (a jersey, a photo). The very argument of what a university is getting, dollar-wise, off an athlete's likeness right now is a pretty nebulous argument anyway. And the biggest offender of all, the old EA Sports NCAA Football games, never had real names in them anyway; where they got into trouble was putting in headshots that looked sort of like athletes in question (but again, you had to stretch to see it), and they could have settled that one forever by not putting headshots in the game at all and also paying a cursory percentage of revenue to graduated players. Instead, everyone decided to dig in and you get the O'Bannon case as a result.
 

JessN

Administrator & Editor-in-Chief
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
6,269
3,827
432
NCAA can ban CA schools, but the law is not unconstitutional. The NCAA is not required for athletics. CA is big enough to do their own sports thing if they wish.
The California rep citing prior losses on anti-trust issues needs to figure out how many of those losses occurred when dealing with student-athletes.

The anti-trust cases I'm aware of almost entirely deal with employees (i.e., the restricted-earnings assistant basketball coach salary case). It is entirely within the purview of the NCAA to legislate eligibility standards just as the USBC can make a determination of amateur status in bowling based on the amount of money won during PBA regional events (if that sounds obscure enough that I might have personal experience with that -- I do).

The NCAA is not required for athletics, you are right about that though. There's always the NAIA.
 

CrimsonNagus

Hall of Fame
Jun 6, 2007
8,470
6,182
212
45
Montgomery, Alabama, United States
What I mean is during the non school days, holiday breaks, summer, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I use to work at a local college. If students were required to be on campus for sports, the dining hall was open for at least 2 meals a day. Dining hall was open on weekends. No student was aloud to stay on campus during holidays, unless require for athletics. Otherwise, you have to leave so that wouldn’t be the schools responsibility.

I just think the eating thing is blown out of proportion. If athletes weren’t going hungry at a small time Div III school, no way they are going hungry at a FBS school.
 

Bamabuzzard

FB Moderator
Staff member
Aug 15, 2004
30,564
18,325
237
48
Where ever there's BBQ, Bourbon & Football
I say that, but let me be clear. I wish semi-pro football was more viable. I wish we could rid ourselves of the Leonard Fournettes and be left with the Tim Tebows of the world. College football doesn't need people like that anyway, some of my favorite players had no pro careers to speak of. We don't need them, but there are many, many players that need college football and one of the best kept secrets is how much has been provided on their behalf.

If you look at athletic department revenue, as I have, and poured over it year after year you start to see where the money comes from. Millions, sometimes well into the tens of millions are donated to athletic departments, sometimes specifically to college football. This might lead to better practice facilities, better equipment, state of the art amenities, but sometimes it goes just to keep the lights on. There are still shortfalls though, and and these are often met one way or the other by the government or the college (which is basically diverting government dollars). It's not uncommon to see an athletic department subsidized in this manner to the tune of 40 million dollars annually.
.......

Like I said before though, if only a semi-pro league was viable, I'd be more than happy to rid college football of people whose only mindset is how much money they can make, that don't value the education, that don't value the great things about college sports. Leave us with the Tebows and we'll be fine, but don't blow the whole thing up because a few people have to wait a couple years for their payday...
Players matter. The reason people take time out of their lives and spend the money they do to watch and/or attend college football games like Alabama, LSU, Ohio St etc is because of the elite product that is on the field. If there was a D-League available that paid the players a decent living wage and provided some form of decent insurance. I think it would begin to hurt the quality of play that remained in the college sector. Because in my opinion you'd not only have elite players like Cecil Collins and the Jamarcus Russell types, who fell in the category of "has no business in college". But you'd run the risk of players like Julio Jones, Mark Ingram, Tim Tebow, Amari Cooper etc. who ARE cut out for college, bypassing college and going straight to a place where they can immediately begin earning a salary. They could easily use the mindset of "I can always go back to college but I can't pass up this opportunity."
 

CrimsonForce

Hall of Fame
Dec 20, 2012
12,757
94
67
I could see a “likeness” account being set up for the video game $ that the players generate. They can access it when their amateur status concludes. Paying them outright is outrageous and will kill the golden goose which I think is the primary motivation for this. It’s a poison pill and NOT anything truly aimed at “helping” the poor and exploited players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They pretty much already did that with the Ed Obannon lawsuit. The settlement was $60M which mean the average payout to players, after lawyer fees, who were in the game during those years was about $1,500 per player. That's what happens when everything gets divided out to 85 players x 120 teams or whatever it is. Not as much money as it seems..
 

Bama 8Ball

1st Team
Oct 10, 2018
410
164
62
Too Far North
So when an Agent or Corporation identifies that 14 year old phenom, like say Julio when he was a high school freshman, can they go ahead and start putting his name on a Jersey? How do they decide what jersey to put it on? Can a University pay the agent to go out and "recruit" these young studs and get them signed up early?

I can't even begin to imagine how this nukes recruiting. We have a Tua- like player all set to come here, and Yella-Wood from cow college comes in and throws $$ at him until he flips? I would be willing to bet Oregon would get EVERY 5 Star they wanted...Nike would make sure of that. And what about T. Boone Pickens?

If we are allowing them to make money, then you know the lawyers, agents, and management companies are already lining up. Definitely not the future of college athletics that I want.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,499
46,842
187
So when an Agent or Corporation identifies that 14 year old phenom, like say Julio when he was a high school freshman, can they go ahead and start putting his name on a Jersey? How do they decide what jersey to put it on? Can a University pay the agent to go out and "recruit" these young studs and get them signed up early?

I can't even begin to imagine how this nukes recruiting. We have a Tua- like player all set to come here, and Yella-Wood from cow college comes in and throws $$ at him until he flips? I would be willing to bet Oregon would get EVERY 5 Star they wanted...Nike would make sure of that. And what about T. Boone Pickens?

If we are allowing them to make money, then you know the lawyers, agents, and management companies are already lining up. Definitely not the future of college athletics that I want.
It will change nothing. The haves will continue to have because they have the markets and $$$. The have nots will continue to have not as they do not have the markets or $$$.
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.