Jump to content
  • Welcome to GoMeanGreen.com!

    Thank you for visiting us!  Registering is easy and free, and provides you with the ability to participate in the discussions along with many cool features and content.

Sign in to follow this  
Skipper

Column: California and New York are setting dangerous precedents with student-athlete pay

Recommended Posts

What's the scholarship limit for FBS football, 85?  How many of those 85 will get "sneaker, or soft drink deals, etc."?  Just the cream of the crop will get the money deals, leaving the rest on the bench.  Would it be a stretch for a car dealer to "give" a stud player a car?

College football as we know is gone.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheColonyEagle said:

That was sort of my point. While the school is making money on the likeness of these elite athletes...the elite athletes are getting free marketing too which helps their draft prospects. They don't have to hire an agent (yet) because the university is their agent. And don't forget the facilities that the athlete is using to get bigger, stronger faster to again...help their draft prospects. 

The best ones don’t need the marketing. Trevor Lawrence or Jadaveon Clowney likely would’ve been first round picks right out of high school. Clowney never wanted to play college football which is why he light footed it his entire junior season. It is why players are skipping bowl games and folks like Nick Bosa are skipping entire seasons to avoid the risk of injury. There needs to be a system where the kids that have zero interest in college to still go to the NFL. The NFL needs a minor league system for this. Maybe they could bring back the AAF to do that or partner with the XFL but it needs to happen because these kids aren’t getting the compensation they deserve due to the 3 years out of high school barrier to entry. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The California law does not have the schools paying any money to the athletes.  It just allows them to make money like any other popular college kid.  If a dealership sponsor wants to pay Fine to show up on a Sunday and sign autographs so they can try to sell a few more cars, who has a problem with that?  This only really applies to a hand full of players. 

This law also gets you around the whole title IX argument that if you pay the football players, you have to pay the girls track team the same amount.  

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Harden said:

The California law does not have the schools paying any money to the athletes.  It just allows them to make money like any other popular college kid.  If a dealership sponsor wants to pay Fine to show up on a Sunday and sign autographs so they can try to sell a few more cars, who has a problem with that?  This only really applies to a hand full of players. 

This law also gets you around the whole title IX argument that if you pay the football players, you have to pay the girls track team the same amount.  

Disagree, this could grow to encompass almost all players.  There is nothing to keep say a booster group from employing every football player on the team in some type of advertising. 

That wonderfully liberal California governor thinks he is opening up deserved opportunities for athletes in his state.   If unchecked, he is creating an unfair advantage for California and other states who follow over other states. 

Other states will have to follow and a real mess is created.   Come to all state U and I can guarantee you someone will employ you for endorsing their products at X amount. 

The potential for abuse is rampant.   Come to Ole U, we have team endorsement contracts.  Transfer to Pro Tech and make more endorsement money than you could ever get at Ole U.  

Every other college kid does not have a full scholarship which is basically an employment contract with the school. 

Although they do a poor job of it, the NCAA's primary focus is keep sports competitive.  

Unless, you want college football to morph into just another pro league the size of the NFL, you should be against the "California athletic scheme". 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Eye Roll 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what if all the football players get paid by boosters?  What is so wrong with 18-22 year old kids, most from low income families, getting a little extra money.

And your argument against paying players is it will be complicated and the NCAA already sucks at their job?

D1 is a professional multi-billion dollar league already and has been for 50 years.  They just figured out how to keep there workers pay down by claiming they are an amateur sport. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Eye Roll 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, GrandGreen said:

Disagree, this could grow to encompass almost all players.  There is nothing to keep say a booster group from employing every football player on the team in some type of advertising. 

That wonderfully liberal California governor thinks he is opening up deserved opportunities for athletes in his state.   If unchecked, he is creating an unfair advantage for California and other states who follow over other states. 

Other states will have to follow and a real mess is created.   Come to all state U and I can guarantee you someone will employ you for endorsing their products at X amount. 

The potential for abuse is rampant.   Come to Ole U, we have team endorsement contracts.  Transfer to Pro Tech and make more endorsement money than you could ever get at Ole U.  

Every other college kid does not have a full scholarship which is basically an employment contract with the school. 

Although they do a poor job of it, the NCAA's primary focus is keep sports competitive.  

Unless, you want college football to morph into just another pro league the size of the NFL, you should be against the "California athletic scheme". 

 

Can you imagine the bidding wars...

School 1:

"#1 recruit, we know someone with a dealership that will pay you $20K a month for your picture"

School 2:

"#1 recruit, we know someone with a dealership that will pay you $30K a month for your picture"

School 1: "35K"

School 2: "$40k"

So what happens if the kid gets hurt. They'll get dumped. Then the "mean ole" company that dumps the poor kid will be in trouble I guess?

All this is going to happen. Would the 20-30 richest schools just break off and form their own league already...

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Harden said:

So what if all the football players get paid by boosters?  What is so wrong with 18-22 year old kids, most from low income families, getting a little extra money.

And your argument against paying players is it will be complicated and the NCAA already sucks at their job?

D1 is a professional multi-billion dollar league already and has been for 50 years.  They just figured out how to keep there workers pay down by claiming they are an amateur sport. 

So pay them. But why give them a scholarship, room and board and books? Pay them $15 an hour for every hour they work for the school.  The students that work at Starbucks and Chickfila get paid an hourly wage and work for multi billion corporations. Why should football players be any different? I say allow them to work extra in the summer. Allow them to sell their picture and jersey for money. But since the education doesn't matter, they can get a loan and pay tuition, their rent and buy their groceries like every other student. Like other students that work on campus. They're not going to make enough money to offset all that but maybe be careful what you wish for.

Do they still have to take classes and be a student? Why don't we just hire football players like we hire other university employees? If they get hurt or play poorly...fire them. That's what they do to Janitors and Professors? that's what they do to the kids that work in the union. Why is no one up in arms about the students working for other companies on campus that "make billions off of exploiting students"

Edited by TheColonyEagle
  • Upvote 1
  • Eye Roll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DeepGreen said:

What's the scholarship limit for FBS football, 85?  How many of those 85 will get "sneaker, or soft drink deals, etc."?  Just the cream of the crop will get the money deals, leaving the rest on the bench.  Would it be a stretch for a car dealer to "give" a stud player a car?

College football as we know is gone.

it's absolutely gone, in it's place is the reality of head trauma and lifelong injuries these guys suffer... I say let them make a buck if they can. it would be nice if football had an actual minor league system instead of having to compete with the NCAA in order to make it to the pros... 

and/or, it would be nice if the NFL didn't have rules prohibiting anyone to be drafted until after they spend an arbitrary amount of time after graduating from high school

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thinking out loud...

If I'm Smiling Joe from Smiling Joe's Car Dealership and I LOVE UCLA Football, and I offer a nice fat deal for the top recruit in the country....can I require the player doesn't leave the University early in order to get paid? I'll pay you $100k to put your pic on my billboard but you have to stay for 4 years. Maybe the player is the #1 draft pick so he breaks the contract and just pays the $100k back? That's what I would do if I were Smiling Joe. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TheColonyEagle said:

So pay them. But why give them a scholarship, room and board and books? Pay them $15 an hour for every hour they work for the school.  The students that work at Starbucks and Chickfila get paid an hourly wage and work for multi billion corporations. Why should football players be any different? I say allow them to work extra in the summer. Allow them to sell their picture and jersey for money. But since the education doesn't matter, they can get a loan and pay tuition, their rent and buy their groceries like every other student. Like other students that work on campus. They're not going to make enough money to offset all that but maybe be careful what you wish for.

Do they still have to take classes and be a student? Why don't we just hire football players like we hire other university employees? If they get hurt or play poorly...fire them. That's what they do to Janitors and Professors? that's what they do to the kids that work in the union. Why is no one up in arms about the students working for other companies on campus that "make billions off of exploiting students"

Once again, the new law is not about the school paying them.  It is allowing them to make money off of their name and likeness. A bar in Denton can pay a fraternity guy to promote on twitter but a football player would get into trouble.  If a music student that is on scholarship and has a large following wants to sign at a the Guitar Center, do you have a problem with that?  The NCAA rules are for 1930's football and technology not 2019. 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a ton of naivete on one side of these arguments, and underselling these young men's special gifts/talents on the other side.

People need to understand that this rule change, although fair in theory, will, with 100% certainty, be manipulated by all schools with money and things will get even worse.

  • Upvote 2
  • Eye Roll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Harden said:

Once again, the new law is not about the school paying them.  It is allowing them to make money off of their name and likeness. A bar in Denton can pay a fraternity guy to promote on twitter but a football player would get into trouble.  If a music student that is on scholarship and has a large following wants to sign at a the Guitar Center, do you have a problem with that?  The NCAA rules are for 1930's football and technology not 2019. 

 

That's fine....but I notice that we don't have a problem with keeping the rules that protect the "student" athlete. The law still requires the university to give the athlete a scholarship. I don't have a problem with them making endorsement money. That's fine. Seems we want it both ways though. If we want to really be "fair market"....we should be putting Rico Bussey on workers comp this year and only give him a 40% scholarship for this year since he's not producing for the university. But we don't. He's protected and gets all tuition, room, board and books paid for. 

The fraternity guy is still going to graduate with $120K in student debt. I hope he is REALLY good at promoting the bar on twitter....

As for your band example, Is their ONE student that is making endorsement money off of Guitar Center? If there is I'll stand corrected....for that matter, some genius on academic scholarship can get an endorsement for winning a chess championship right? But you're talking about a handful of extreme hypotheticals vs thousands of student athletes.

If we're going to take the universities out of the equation...let's take them out of the equation. No more athletic scholarships. Open bidding. Get enough endorsement money to pay for your tuition, room, board and books. More power to you. Don't want to pay tuition? I guess....go to the XFL? Arena League? Lobby the NFL to allow 18 year olds to enter the draft. You know what's NOT 1930s football? The nutrition programs and strength programs and facilities paid for by the universities that get 190 lb 18 year olds to 220 lb 21 year olds ready to play in the NFL.

Maybe an 18 year old should hire a trainer and work out for 3 years and then enter the draft? No one says you can't do that I don't think...

  • Eye Roll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to keep in mind. College Football has no competition. You have 2 choices: play college football or don't play college football.

If you think full ride college athletes live harder than the average, working, non full ride student....then I don't know what to tell you.

Every student that works while they're in college.....works for some entity that is really rich. All of these entities make money off of the cheaply paid college student. If I work in retail in college and I have an exceptional skill....the company that employs me is going to make more money off of me even though I get paid the same.

Why are athletes any different?

Again...I don't have a problem with them selling autographs. That's fine. It's going to damage college athletics as a whole but so be it.

 

One thing will make all this moot: remove the restriction for entering the NFL. Allow 18 year olds to enter the draft. It's done. True free market choice.

 

Edited by TheColonyEagle
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Harden said:

Once again, the new law is not about the school paying them. 

To emphasize this point: the new law DOES require the school to keep them on scholarship. Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m glad they did it. Hope all states follow suit. And yes, I’m being serious. I think it can even the playing field even more for the G5 and mid to lower P5. Look at places like DFW and think of the corporate impact possible among the 3 metroplex schools. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Got5onIt said:

I’m glad they did it. Hope all states follow suit. And yes, I’m being serious. I think it can even the playing field even more for the G5 and mid to lower P5. Look at places like DFW and think of the corporate impact possible among the 3 metroplex schools. 

SMU will LOVE it

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, TheColonyEagle said:

SMU will LOVE it

No doubt.   SMU will pick right back up where they left off.   Of course, this time, they won't be paid directly by the athletic dept., rather, sneaky boosters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheColonyEagle said:

That's fine....but I notice that we don't have a problem with keeping the rules that protect the "student" athlete. The law still requires the university to give the athlete a scholarship. I don't have a problem with them making endorsement money. That's fine. Seems we want it both ways though. If we want to really be "fair market"....we should be putting Rico Bussey on workers comp this year and only give him a 40% scholarship for this year since he's not producing for the university. But we don't. He's protected and gets all tuition, room, board and books paid for. 

The fraternity guy is still going to graduate with $120K in student debt. I hope he is REALLY good at promoting the bar on twitter....

As for your band example, Is their ONE student that is making endorsement money off of Guitar Center? If there is I'll stand corrected....for that matter, some genius on academic scholarship can get an endorsement for winning a chess championship right? But you're talking about a handful of extreme hypotheticals vs thousands of student athletes.

If we're going to take the universities out of the equation...let's take them out of the equation. No more athletic scholarships. Open bidding. Get enough endorsement money to pay for your tuition, room, board and books. More power to you. Don't want to pay tuition? I guess....go to the XFL? Arena League? Lobby the NFL to allow 18 year olds to enter the draft. You know what's NOT 1930s football? The nutrition programs and strength programs and facilities paid for by the universities that get 190 lb 18 year olds to 220 lb 21 year olds ready to play in the NFL.

Maybe an 18 year old should hire a trainer and work out for 3 years and then enter the draft? No one says you can't do that I don't think...

i think a better example and a more obvious one is simpler to illustrate this point... a couple of years ago Donald De La Haye was a kicker for UCF and decided he wanted to start a youtube channel. His youtube channel was doing great, and per youtube's policies, they started paying him for his videos because he had so many views.

Somehow the NCAA finds out, and because he uses his athletic abilities/status as an college athlete the NCAA says he needs to either stop making money off his youtube videos or stop playing football. 

There are MULTIPLE ways for students to make money off youtube/twitch/instagram/patreon while being a 'normal' college student. yet, De La Haye was not allowed to because he kicked footballs. 

With this new rule change, that is out the window and De la Haye could've completed his career at UCF with some great teams, while earning some harmless bucks on the side.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, golfingomez said:

With this new rule change, that is out the window and De la Haye could've completed his career at UCF with some great teams, while earning some harmless bucks on the side.

That's fine....

But the bucks will soon become NOT harmless....

I don't know how to get around it though. 

I'm thinking of 10 different ways a rich booster can exploit that example. 

 

It looks as though he chose to forgo his college football career and instead make money with You Tube. Seems like he made a choice that was best for him. What's wrong with that? Make money or go to college....college students make that choice all the time. Why does he HAVE to be able to have his cake and eat it too?

Sometimes you have to sacrifice something. 

Edited by TheColonyEagle
  • Eye Roll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever these California and New York laws say, NCAA regs still prohibit it.  So unless the NCAA changes its stance, any programs that go along with this are still subject to sanctions.  For now, these laws are meaningless.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These laws, if they stand, will effectively destroy  college sports. There  will be no regulation of money. The costs, the agents, the ripoffs,  the law suites, the  guaranteed money,  the acting bad, 18 year olds with that kind of money overnight, parents mismanaging money, drugs, sex scandals it will go off the scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KingDL1 said:

These laws, if they stand, will effectively destroy  college sports. There  will be no regulation of money. The costs, the agents, the ripoffs,  the law suites, the  guaranteed money,  the acting bad, 18 year olds with that kind of money overnight, parents mismanaging money, drugs, sex scandals it will go off the scale.

 

Umm, that’s the current state of college athletics. So what’s going to change? Some kids can make a few bucks without getting in trouble...

Edited by Got5onIt
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Got5onIt said:

 

Umm, that’s the current state of college athletics. So what’s going to change? Some kids can make a few bucks without getting in trouble...

No, not at all, that is just being cynical. It will literally be a 1000 times worse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.