California NCAA Legislation

[Scott Dierking]

38 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

People working where they want to work 

As to this point, I am not sure how athletes are going to "pick" the schools they want to go to. There will still be a recruiting process, there will still be a vetting process of skill, personality and needs, and then an offer will be made. Some will have many offers. Certainly not a majority. 

And then the athletes chooses where he chooses to attend school and play. 

 

[dbatesman]

Just now, Scott Dierking said:

As to this point, I am not sure how athletes are going to "pick" the schools they want to go to. There will still be a recruiting process, there will still be a vetting process of skill, personality and needs, and then an offer will be made. Some will have many offers. Certainly not a majority. 

And then the athletes chooses where he chooses to attend school and play. 

Yes, and?

[Scott Dierking]

1 minute ago, Darnold Schwarzenegger said:

But what is the school really giving up? A seat in a classroom? That costs the schools nothing.  Universities takes in millions from athletics. Why not give the players a small percentage.  

Are you going to do it for every sport? Are you going to do it equally?

What will probably happen if you choose to do it for every sport.some of the smaller sports will be cut. As is happening today at some colleges. 

Temple University no longer has a baseball team. One example of many.

[Scott Dierking]

2 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

Yes, and?

You had seemed to indicate under this new system, players will "pick" where they will go. 

Not sure what system you are using there.

[msena88]

Just now, Darnold Schwarzenegger said:

But what is the school really giving up? A seat in a classroom? That costs the schools nothing.  Universities takes in millions from athletics. Why not give the players a small percentage.  

They are given a small percentage, it's just not in the form of cash. Have you ever seen the facilities/services the kids are given access to? Go look up the food options the regular students have access to and then what the athletes are given, the overwhelming academic support they have access to, etc.... These kids have no clue what being a regular student means.

Despite there already being inequities in recruiting in regards to improper benefits, if you remove the regulations it will only get worse. Just because something suddenly no longer becomes illegal, doesn't mean the situation improves.

[sec101row23]

1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said:

Are you going to do it for every sport? Are you going to do it equally?

What will probably happen if you choose to do it for every sport.some of the smaller sports will be cut. As is happening today at some colleges. 

Temple University no longer has a baseball team. One example of many.

Title IX had a lot to do with that.   

[Scott Dierking]

Just now, sec101row23 said:

Title XI had a lot to do with that.   

It sure did. But universities having to pay all athletes something will have a deeper chilling affect.

[sec101row23]

1 minute ago, msena88 said:

They are given a small percentage, it's just not in the form of cash. Have you ever seen the facilities/services the kids are given access to? Go look up the food options the regular students have access to and then what the athletes are given, the overwhelming academic support they have access to, etc.... These kids have no clue what being a regular student means.

Despite there already being inequities in recruiting in regards to improper benefits, if you remove the regulations it will only get worse. Just because something suddenly no longer becomes illegal, doesn't mean the situation improves.

Agreed.  It will eventually lead to a new “elite division” or new “power conferences”.  

[sec101row23]

1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said:

It sure did. But universities having to pay all athletes something will have a deeper chilling affect.

Agreed.  That’s why I think Title IX will play a role in all of this before it is said and done.  

[talonmm]

18 minutes ago, Thai Jet said:

Yup NCAA can declare California teams off limits as far as other non Cal teams playing against them. They'd only have themselves to play against. How many people want to just see Stanford, Cal, USC and UCLA play against each other ? No Bowl games unless it's against each other.  Good old California... leading the Nation into ruin one step at a time.

Except watch other states follow California's lead....  Other states will have to join in as their Universities will be at a tremendous recruiting disadvantage. 

What will those whores at the NCAA do when other states join in?  Ban every school in the Country?

[section314]

4 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Are you going to do it for every sport? Are you going to do it equally?

What will probably happen if you choose to do it for every sport.some of the smaller sports will be cut. As is happening today at some colleges. 

Temple University no longer has a baseball team. One example of many.

And Rutgers doesn't have football anymore.?

[Scott Dierking]

5 minutes ago, msena88 said:

 Have you ever seen the facilities/services the kids are given access to? Go look up the food options the regular students have access to and then what the athletes are given.

Athletes have the same food and relatively the same benefits regular students have. In some cases, the dorms are somewhat better.

When they are on the road, they do get stipends for food.

Now, they do have academic priviliges that other students do not have in terms of getting classes they need and scheduling flexibility. They also have mandatory study halls and academic requirements (and I know, some skirt this).

 

[sec101row23]

2 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Athletes have the same food and relatively the and benefits regular students have. In some cases, the dorms are somewhat better.

When they are on the road, they do get stipends for food.

Now, they do have academic priviliges that other students do not have in terms of getting classes they need and scheduling flexibility. They also have mandatory study halls and academic requirements (and I know, some skirt this).

 

That may depend on the school.  I can attest that at Clemson the food and accommodations are VERY different for the athletes than the average students.  The football and baseball teams essentially have their own “campus” available to them.  

[msena88]

3 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Athletes have the same food and relatively the same benefits regular students have. In some cases, the dorms are somewhat better.

When they are on the road, they do get stipends for food.

Now, they do have academic priviliges that other students do not have in terms of getting classes they need and scheduling flexibility. They also have mandatory study halls and academic requirements (and I know, some skirt this).

 

They do not have the same food, the athletes of course have access to the same facilities the rest of the student body does but you’ve clearly never been in the athletic facility for a major program.

Im an Ohio State alum and the food available to them in their practice facility is so far above and beyond anything available to the regular students.

[JustInFudge]

17 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

What you will have is a "haves" and "have nots" culture within some teams.

The 3-5% of athletes that will get paid at some schools will benefit, while the rest of their teammates will be without that.

Not just that, they dont even have to attend class!  Could you imagine the dynamic in the locker room.  Some sh*t head uber talented teenager making six figures because he's likeable, ends up sucking but your C, who's a straight A student, goes to class, does all the right things, doesnt make a dime yet every Saturday, he's taking on the next Aaron Donald for free! 

 

[dbatesman]

11 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

You had seemed to indicate under this new system, players will "pick" where they will go. 

No I didn't, as indicated by your need to put scare quotes around a word I never used.

[Scott Dierking]

I have to assume that this is all an offshoot of the Ed O'Bannan decision vs the NCAA. They decided the same thing. You have to pay players for their likeness.

The result? there are no more NCAA video games in the last 4 years or so.

I am guesding the decision here (and I have not read the ruling and interpretation) is that athletes can now be paid for promotion. So if that is the case, how many college athletes will benefit largely (or even in some small way) for that? Nationally, maybe .01% of all athletes. On a local level? Maybe you get 1-2 percent of athletes. But those won't be big deals.

Am I interpreting this correctly???

 

 

[JustInFudge]

17 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

Well, that settles that.

You're laughing at it but this is the feeling of 95% of parents who kids play college athletics. 

T

[sec101row23]

3 minutes ago, JiF said:

Not just that, they dont even have to attend class!  Could you imagine the dynamic in the locker room.  Some sh*t head uber talented teenager making six figures because he's likeable, ends up sucking but your C, who's a straight A student, goes to class, does all the right things, doesnt make a dime yet every Saturday, he's taking on the next Aaron Donald for free! 

 

People think the transfer portal is busy now, wait till agents are representing these players....Lol.

[Scott Dierking]

3 minutes ago, msena88 said:

They do not have the same food, the athletes of course have access to the same facilities the rest of the student body does but you’ve clearly never been in the athletic facility for a major program.

Im an Ohio State alum and the food available to them in their practice facility is so far above and beyond anything available to the regular students.

I went to school at Penn State. Of course that was 33 years ago, and I am sure things have changed.

Honestly, I am amazed at the food options regular students have these days. Waaaaay better.

[Scott Dierking]

21 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

I'm saying the contract should be rewritten so it's fair.

How else am I to interpret "people choosing where they want to play'. Sorry I used the word "pick".

Carry on.

[Matt39]

8 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

That may depend on the school.  I can attest that at Clemson the food and accommodations are VERY different for the athletes than the average students.  The football and baseball teams essentially have their own “campus” available to them.  

Clemson facilities are ridiculous. Add on unlimited free Nike gear.

[Scott Dierking]

22 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

Well, that settles that.

What's your experience, and the experiences of those you have spoken with personally?

[Warfish]

34 minutes ago, Thai Jet said:

Yup NCAA can declare California teams off limits as far as other non Cal teams playing against them. They'd only have themselves to play against. How many people want to just see Stanford, Cal, USC and UCLA play against each other ? No Bowl games unless it's against each other.  Good old California... leading the Nation into ruin one step at a time.

That was my thought as well.  Same theory that could (should?) be used against the Yankees if MLB ever wants to impose a real, meaningful, NFL-style salary cap system.

[msena88]

3 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

People think the transfer portal is busy now, wait till agents are representing these players....Lol.

Kids will be transferring annually, if you want to maximize your earnings in an extremely regional sport you need exposure to as many markets as possible

[Scott Dierking]

Just now, Matt39 said:

. Add on unlimited free Nike gear.

Yes, that is a benefit. True

[sec101row23]

2 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

I have to assume that this is all an offshoot of the Ed O'Bannan decision vs the NCAA. They decided the same thing. You have to pay players for their likeness.

The result? there are no more NCAA video games in the last 4 years or so.

I am guesding the decision here (and I have not read the ruling and interpretation) is that athletes can now be paid for promotion. So if that is the case, how many college athletes will benefit largely (or even in some small way) for that? Nationally, maybe .01% of all athletes. On a local level? Maybe you get 1-2 percent of athletes. But those won't be big deals.

Am I interpreting this correctly???

 

 

I read through the ruling best I could, it essentially allows them to profit from brand sponsorships and endorsements and allows them to hire an agent right out of high school.   Essentially paving the way to pay for players.  

[FireTheJohnsons]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

College sports is about to be ruined too.

NBA and NFL are garbage. 

So MLB?

I started watching Hockey.  Hoping that will stick.  The Islanders are good, I think. 

Hockey is the best sport on the planet, nothing even compares. The NHL is also the best pro league. Has its issues, but is by far the best. The skill of the modern day NHL player is amazing and makes for a really amazing game

[Scott Dierking]

Just now, msena88 said:

Kids will be transferring annually, if you want to maximize your earnings in an extremely regional sport you need exposure to as many markets as possible

The transfer portal is already beginning this process.

[JustInFudge]

3 minutes ago, sec101row23 said:

People think the transfer portal is busy now, wait till agents are representing these players....Lol.

The amount of hands that will be greased just to "represent" these players in back alley handshakes is going to be terrifying.  

[sec101row23]

4 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Clemson facilities are ridiculous. Add on unlimited free Nike gear.

True.  Until the new 5 star recruit signs an endorsement deal with Adidas, how does that play out?  Nike pays huge money for the EXCLUSIVE right to outfit these programs.  Can’t have Trevor Lawrence rocking Adidas every Saturday.  There will be unintended consequences to all of this.  

[sec101row23]

2 minutes ago, JiF said:

The amount of hands that will be greased just to "represent" these players in back alley handshakes is going to be terrifying.  

It’s going to get dirty, even more than it is now.  

[section314]

14 minutes ago, JiF said:

Not just that, they dont even have to attend class!  Could you imagine the dynamic in the locker room.  Some sh*t head uber talented teenager making six figures because he's likeable, ends up sucking but your C, who's a straight A student, goes to class, does all the right things, doesnt make a dime yet every Saturday, he's taking on the next Aaron Donald for free! 

  

It's funny, Boomer was asked basically this same thing this morning. He said, to paraphrase " if it were me, I'd take my entire Oline out every lady's night at our favorite bar and beers would be on me. All season long."  Thought that was a pretty cool answer.

[sec101row23]

1 minute ago, section314 said:

It's funny, Boomer was asked basically this same this morning. He said, to paraphrase " if it were me, I'd take my entire Oline out every lady's night at our favorite bar and beers would be on me. All season long."  Thought that was a pretty cool answer.

Although, since there would no longer be “improper benefits”, the bar would most likely comp the players anyway.  

[Scott Dierking]

7 minutes ago, Warfish said:

That was my thought as well.  Same theory that could (should?) be used against the Yankees if MLB ever wants to impose a real, meaningful, NFL-style salary cap system.

MLB does have a form of the cap now. It is pretty punitive. It is why you are seeing the Yankees actually being somewhat conservative. It is why the Cubs said they have no more money to spend. It is why the Red Sox have to consider trading Mookie Betts. It is why your Nats have not gone nuts (or super nuts) on Harper and Rendon.