Jump to content

U.S. Supreme Court Strikes First Nail in the NCAA Coffin


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 176
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

excited for people to vociferously defend the “sanctity” and “purity” of what is essentially a massive workers comp avoidance scheme

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/supreme-court-ncaa-student-athlete-decision https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/politics/ncaa-supreme-court/index.html TLDR:  NCAA loses in a unanimous Supreme Cour

In my ideal world, colleges can be what they're supposed to be, institutions of education.  Not professional sports leagues with an uncompensated labor force. Sports activities, including and esp

Posted Images

probably being too optimistic but maybe its just one of the moves towards reforming higher education into a more competitive product for the families' money. this generation of young adults will not blindly put their kids in these institutions without better results.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jago said:

probably being too optimistic but maybe its just one of the moves towards reforming higher education into a more competitive product for the families' money. this generation of young adults will not blindly put their kids in these institutions without better results.

we're not doing that conversation here

this is about legal adult football players getting paid for more than tuition + r&b in a $4bn/year spectator sport

  • Upvote 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

There will be good and bad that comes out of this. Good is that some of the college athletes will get some form of smaller amount of compensation. Bad that it will be the death knell for many of the non-revenue sports.

It’s certainly going to change a ton of stuff. Non revenue sports will obviously go.

  • Upvote 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When you are an NCAA Division 1 athlete, your offer is normally year by year (a few are guaranteed for multi years). Meaning that your scholarship is renewed annually. 

Now, most schools will renew your scholarship annually, unless you are a real bad egg or a problem maker. Schools don't want to gain the reputation as scholarship puller.

This past year, for spring sports, schools go a little bit nastier. They felt they had to because the NCAA gave spring athletes an extra year of eligibility. But, they held scholarships at their same numbers. This created a scholarship crunch for some sports. Programs began to subtly "push" kids in a gentle way off rosters so that they could recruit anew and get fresh blood in.

The system they may adapt here may really force programs to become a "real business", now. Meaning, little Johnny that is at the lower end of the depth chart, may now not have his scholarship renewed. You can be sure that programs will do that.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Warfish said:

In my ideal world, colleges can be what they're supposed to be, institutions of education.  Not professional sports leagues with an uncompensated labor force.

Sports can and will still survive in that world, just not as they are today.  I.e. they will be amateur and club sports, part of teaching/education, competing against local schools.  They will not be national professional for-profit sports leagues as both the NCAA football and basketball are now.  Universities should be about one job and doing one job well, education.

Better yet, it opens a potentially huge market for minor/developmental sports leagues for both Basketball and Football that do not really exist today, and opportunity for businesses to properly serve those markets, compensate their labor, and (I would hope) bring professional-quality sports to smaller cities around the country. 

Hahahahahaha. Good one. Nice idea, but will not happen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

we're not doing that conversation here

this is about legal adult football players getting paid for more than tuition + r&b in a $4bn/year spectator sport

ok..not trying to being political. just saying the big sports money controls a lot of decisions by the schools, and to your point the athletes are the $$$ attraction. cheerio.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Hahahahahaha. Good one. Nice idea, but will not happen. 

With title IX- how will any of this work without slashing pretty much every sport besides football and women’s basketball?

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

With title IX- how will any of this work without slashing pretty much every sport besides football and women’s basketball?

That is what the NCAA will say. 

This type of thing will mainly help one small entity--The athletes who are very, very good. The ones that it will hurt the most are the ones it should be helping, the smaller guy (or gal) that just wants to play a sport they love while going to school.

One does not punish the NCAA (though they very much deserve it). You punish the NCAA, they will make sure it trickles down to the ones that deserve it least.

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Scott Dierking said:

That is what the NCAA will say. 

This type of thing will mainly help one small entity--The athletes who are very, very good. The ones that it will hurt the most are the ones it should be helping, the smaller guy (or gal) that just wants to play a sport they love while going to school.

One does not punish the NCAA (though they very much deserve it. You punish the NCAA, they will make sure it trickles down to the ones that deserve it least.

It’s a broken system that either has to be totally eliminated or kept as is. I don’t see any in between.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get it. So whats it all mean? No more ncaa fb? Cmon now thats crazy.

or the kids will get a stipend? All? Or just the elites? Or no more college fb at all and strictly high school into minor league system?

seriously ignorant  here

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HighPitch said:

I dont get it. So whats it all mean? No more ncaa fb? Cmon now thats crazy.

or the kids will get a stipend? All? Or just the elites? Or no more college fb at all and strictly high school into minor league system?

seriously ignorant  here

And that is just the way it is-ambiguous. It means everything, while at the same time meaning nothing at all.

The biggest upshot of this has been revolving around NCAA players wanting compensation for entities using their "likeness". Advertising, video games, etc. It is also morphing into a want for pay for hire. 

These arguments have been around for ages, but they are finally getting some teeth. The NCAA, the big, bad beast that it is will tamp as much of this down as they can (because they do not like any one else sharing in their money, while being sanctimonious), and threaten that the big sports, money makers that they are, support all of the smaller sports that are non -revenue generating. And, to a small degree, they are correct. But we can be sure that they are not THAT true. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

That is what the NCAA will say. 

This type of thing will mainly help one small entity--The athletes who are very, very good. The ones that it will hurt the most are the ones it should be helping, the smaller guy (or gal) that just wants to play a sport they love while going to school.

One does not punish the NCAA (though they very much deserve it). You punish the NCAA, they will make sure it trickles down to the ones that deserve it least.

Sounds like an argument of the ends justifying the means.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul is a weak argument to justify allowing rich school administrators to benefit at the expense of players who actually built the brand.  This decision is well overdue.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jetscode1 said:

Sounds like an argument of the ends justifying the means.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul is a weak argument to justify allowing rich school administrators to benefit at the expense of players who actually built the brand.  This decision is well overdue.  

It certainly is true. The smaller sports do not support themselves from a revenue generating perspective. It is impossible. And the Universities will tell you, well in order to keep them, we need to raise tuition for everyone then. Not going to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this whole issue is going to be a mess. 

It's an extremely small group who would benefit at the expense of the system. 

I have yet to hear someone come up with a better system than the one that is currently in place, no matter how many issues it has. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

That is what the NCAA will say. 

This type of thing will mainly help one small entity--The athletes who are very, very good. The ones that it will hurt the most are the ones it should be helping, the smaller guy (or gal) that just wants to play a sport they love while going to school.

One does not punish the NCAA (though they very much deserve it. You punish the NCAA, they will make sure it trickles down to the ones that deserve it least.

Would expect things with evolve with the big conferences getting stronger in basketball and football. And some colleges making the decision rather than get their asses beat by the big boys, better to downgrade.- be that D1AA or D2 or 3.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

Hahahahahaha. Good one. Nice idea, but will not happen. 

It may not.  I did preface it with "in my ideal world".  I.e. it's how I think things should work.

We'll see how the law plays out.  Ultimately, I think all of the NCAA's athlete compensation rules will get tossed as illegal and the NCAA's power materially reduced.  

Then, it will be about how schools (the vast bulk of whom are part of State Governments, it should be reminded) handle that sea change, and the potentially massive reduction of pure profit such a change might entail once "student" athletes are more accurately identified as paid professional athletes first, students second (if that), and when those athletes demand compensation equivalent to their economic impact for the school, including TV contracts, memorabilia (Jersey) sales and more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Scott Dierking said:

There will be good and bad that comes out of this. Good is that some of the college athletes will get some form of smaller amount of compensation. Bad that it will be the death knell for many of the non-revenue sports.

I'm curious to see what happens. You can definitely keep smaller sports in college.

1) Athlete can make money off image and likeness

2) Athlete gets a portion of his/her jersey sales

3) Remove the transfer rule entirely to allow growth for players who out preform their monetary pool

Those rules alone would not cost schools money as they wouldn't have made it without the player regardless. I don't think anyone expects badminton players to make the same as a Basketball or Football player.

As mentioned in other comments this will open the door for developmental leagues that should already be a thing.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scott Dierking said:

It certainly is true. The smaller sports do not support themselves from a revenue generating perspective. It is impossible. And the Universities will tell you, well in order to keep them, we need to raise tuition for everyone then. Not going to happen.

I'd agree it will have a ripple effect on the other sports that are not self-generating enough revenue.  Tuition is already too high and most consumers are already pushing back on the current costs.  Looks like the NCAA has a problem.  Maybe they can try a solution that doesn't exploit labor laws.  I'd suggest, de-linking all sports from schools but I'm in the minority.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Warfish said:

It may not.  I did preface it with "in my ideal world".  I.e. it's how I think things should work.

We'll see how the law plays out.  Ultimately, I think all of the NCAA's athlete compensation rules will get tossed as illegal and the NCAA's power materially reduced.  

Then, it will be about how schools (the vast bulk of whom are part of State Governments, it should be reminded) handle that sea change, and the potentially massive reduction of pure profit such a change might entail once "student" athletes are more accurately identified as paid professional athletes first, students second (if that), and when those athletes demand compensation equivalent to their economic impact for the school, including TV contracts, memorabilia (Jersey) sales and more.

I would like to think that your way would have a chance, but it can't. There are huge economies that actually subsist as feeders because of this system. Towns like State College, Pa, Ann Arbor, MI, and hundreds of other towns that would be holes, were it not for "non-professional athletes".

And let's not forget the universities that exist because of this system as well. Do yourself a favor some time and walk on a campus university in the summer some time. What you will see are construction and maintenance jobs in hyper drive. These universities are rapidly growing small cities. Being driven in part by college spending. Being driven in part by college subsidies including large athletics and merchandise.

No one, no matter how stupid they are, is willing to kill that golden goose. Our economy as a whole needs it.

 

  • Post of the Week 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

I'm curious to see what happens. You can definitely keep smaller sports in college.

1) Athlete can make money off image and likeness

2) Athlete gets a portion of his/her jersey sales

3) Remove the transfer rule entirely to allow growth for players who out preform their monetary pool

Those rules alone would not cost schools money as they wouldn't have made it without the player regardless. I don't think anyone expects badminton players to make the same as a Basketball or Football player.

As mentioned in other comments this will open the door for developmental leagues that should already be a thing.

With that you're getting into other legal issues. Think about how many recruitment scandals we've seen over the past few years, some with the FBI involved.

There's a lot more to it than "players get paid". And that statement in itself is also troubling because it makes it sound like every kid but the reality is the Mac Jones and Justin Fields will get paid, everyone else not so much. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Warfish said:

In my ideal world, colleges can be what they're supposed to be, institutions of education.  Not professional sports leagues with an uncompensated labor force.

Sports activities, including and especially "non-revenue" sports, can and will still survive in that world, just not as they are today.  I.e. they will be amateur and club sports, part of teaching/education and serving actual students, competing against local schools.  They will not be national professional for-profit big-TV-contract sports leagues as both the NCAA football and basketball are now. 

Our Universities should be about one job and doing that one job well, education.

Better yet, it opens a potentially huge market for minor/developmental sports leagues for both Basketball and Football that do not really exist today, and opportunity for businesses to properly serve those markets, compensate their labor, and (I would hope) bring professional-quality sports to smaller cities around the country. 

I agree.

I personally like the setup baseball has. Kids in baseball have options. Go to college and play baseball. Go to the minors and focus only on baseball. Or go to the minors and take college courses part-time. Kids can take the road that best fits them.

It’s even great from a fan perspective. Minor league games are family friendly and can be supported by a small city.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to know what a fist that the NCAA has had over student/athletes, just consider that until very recently, it was almost impossible for a student/athlete to be able to go play for another school. Universities forbade it, they would not allow you to transfer to a school within your conference, and they would make you sit out for a year to play at the new school.

This is the iron fist that the NCAA governed with, along with the conferences. Imagine this in the "real" world.

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.

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.




×
×
  • Create New...