Big XII leading the way

Discussion in 'Big XII Conference' started by Mr Janny, Aug 7, 2014.

  1. Mr Janny

    Mr Janny Welcome to the Office of Secret Intelligence
    Staff Member

    Mar 27, 2006
    28,496
    1,067
    113
  2. im4cyclones

    im4cyclones Well-Known Member

    Jun 14, 2010
    3,665
    75
    48
    Ames, IA
    Paying athletes for their names and likenesses is absolutely correct. The mutually beneficial agreement happens on the field -- George gets training and coaching and, in return, George delivers a high level of play. It is a sham that ISU could sell Jeremiah George jerseys and profit off of him in ancillary goods like merchandise.
     
  3. RubyClone

    RubyClone Active Member

    Mar 21, 2014
    3,111
    17
    38
    This. Somebody needs to explain to me how we start paying players for their likeness and name, and not expect that the major players like tOSU, Alabama, FSU, OU, Texas - who already dominate the money game, won't actually increase their advantage when they can afford to pay more for a likeness.

    Seems to me that once the money starts getting handed out, it'll be way to easy to funnel more and more to the top players. And as such - we may as well let the top 10 (money) programs just play in their own league, because there will be no chance at parity.
     
  4. Tre4ISU

    Tre4ISU Well-Known Member

    Dec 31, 2008
    22,175
    726
    113
    Ninja
    Estherville
    Stupid argument. They can still only roster so many players and a lot of those players are going to go to one of those "10" schools anyway.
     
  5. mj4cy

    mj4cy Asst. Regional Manager
    Staff Member

    Mar 29, 2006
    21,944
    490
    83
    Structural Engineer
    Ankeny

    But ISU also gave George the platform to showcase his talents and now he's making 6-7 figures.
     
  6. Bigman38

    Bigman38 Well-Known Member

    Jul 27, 2010
    7,346
    102
    63
    Council Bluffs, IA
    If it happens that is exactly what will happen. I like the idea, in theory, for paying players but still haven't seen a model that won't make the rich a lot richer.
     
  7. RubyClone

    RubyClone Active Member

    Mar 21, 2014
    3,111
    17
    38
    #7 RubyClone, Aug 7, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 7, 2014


    So you think if Allen Lazard could get paid in college, he's not going to the highest bidder? Which almost certainly isn't ISU?

    We're lucky when we get a top prospect. Throw money into the equation - we have no chance. This happens, and we may as well another division because the "have nots" will be even worse off.

    And I'm not saying kids in college shouldn't get a little something - but IMO it has to be even across all, and not some sort of tiered system.
     
  8. Tre4ISU

    Tre4ISU Well-Known Member

    Dec 31, 2008
    22,175
    726
    113
    Ninja
    Estherville
    #8 Tre4ISU, Aug 7, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 7, 2014
    Do you think Lazard didn't have the option of taking some money from someone and do you think under a different system ISU wouldn't offer the same for someone like him?
     
  9. Tre4ISU

    Tre4ISU Well-Known Member

    Dec 31, 2008
    22,175
    726
    113
    Ninja
    Estherville
    Right. This is the issue I have BUT it's a different issue. I don't like that people don't consider the opportunity these guys are given to showcase and that people don't consider the value of a degree, but likeness is a different issue.
     
  10. Bigman38

    Bigman38 Well-Known Member

    Jul 27, 2010
    7,346
    102
    63
    Council Bluffs, IA
    Huh? You really don't think big schools being able to pay big money is going to create even worse parity then there already is in college football?
     
  11. RubyClone

    RubyClone Active Member

    Mar 21, 2014
    3,111
    17
    38
    Well - right now he can't take money by rule. So there's a consequence he's perhaps not willing to accept.

    But if it's within the rules, and somehow contingent upon worth (whatever you want to call it, but not equal among all players, all schools) then there's a bidding war. And you really think ISU could offer as much (to as many players) as an Alabama or Texas or X other schools.

    The competitive gap will open even further. Worse yet, once this happens in FB, it'll extend to every other sport too and we can then kiss a lot of top prospects in MBB goodbye as well.

    Face it - money corrupts everything and we don't have the money.
     
  12. JohnnyFive

    JohnnyFive Well-Known Member

    Feb 25, 2012
    4,150
    28
    48
    #12 JohnnyFive, Aug 7, 2014
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2014
    The only model that works IMO is the so-called Division 4, where total revenue is spilt evenly and divided among everyone on that level equally. Every athlete and every school receives the same amount, sort of like the NFL's merchandise agreement. Do the Cowboys sell more stuff/generate more interest than the Jags? Of course they so. All teams divide it evenly though. Without an agreement like this, the same universities that can offer the most money will always dominate recruiting and any semblance of a fair competition is out the door.

    I dont think any of this ever happens though. Schools like Texas make it's money, schools like Texas will want to keep its money.
     
  13. swarthmoreCY

    swarthmoreCY Well-Known Member

    Aug 9, 2008
    15,642
    229
    63
    Here nor there
    Paying players is actually an equalizer (especially if done with a salary cap). Look at recruiting the past 30-50 years- it is not an open market now, as the currencies are tradition, location, and arms-race spending. Paying players removes barriers to entry. It is a lot easier for a school to sneak in a better offer last minute than change tradition or location.
     
  14. Tre4ISU

    Tre4ISU Well-Known Member

    Dec 31, 2008
    22,175
    726
    113
    Ninja
    Estherville
    You guys aren't getting it. Where are the best recruits going right now? They are already going to those programs. They will just get paid more by going to them now. When's the last time we beat those guys for a recruit under the current system? The recruit distribution would be the same. There are only so many spots at those schools. It's not like they can just pay however many players they want and it wouldn't surprise me to see scholarship limits reduced slightly actually increasing parity.
     
  15. RubyClone

    RubyClone Active Member

    Mar 21, 2014
    3,111
    17
    38
    #15 RubyClone, Aug 7, 2014
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2014
    This I agree with as well. And I expect that the NCAA and other institutions will try to circumvent this by no longer allowing such likenesses. But that train has already left the station.

    What are some examples of where Jeremiah should get some $$ for use of his likeness? Or even go back to Seneca, probably the most marketable ISU FB in recent memory.
     
  16. RubyClone

    RubyClone Active Member

    Mar 21, 2014
    3,111
    17
    38
    I believe Lazard is on campus right now.

    We get it just fine. It's not just that we can't afford them. It's that they can afford MORE.

    Sure - we and the other bottom 90 schools get the scraps - mostly cause of playing time, or some other loyalty. But again, money will change that.

    Let me just ask straight out. Are you advocating that players get paid something (evenly), or get paid based on some marketing value?

    What does scholarship limit have to do with this? You're paying kids. So you just pay them to pay their own way.
     
  17. Bigman38

    Bigman38 Well-Known Member

    Jul 27, 2010
    7,346
    102
    63
    Council Bluffs, IA
    So you think Lazard signs with ISU if Notre Dame can offer him a lot more money? That's just the ISU example, there are dozens of schools that aren't elite that get a couple top recruits every year. Does that still happen if they can't pay as much as the elite schools? Of course not.

    The elite schools will get even more of the top recruits unless you can figure out how to cap it a price most schools can afford to pay. In the list of priorities money would be #1, creating a new huge advantage for the big schools.
     
  18. jbhtexas

    jbhtexas Well-Known Member

    Oct 20, 2006
    12,004
    475
    83
    Arlington, TX
    Paying players isn't going to equalize anything. The traditional powers that have all those things you mention going for them also typically have the most money, and will be able to pay the most. ISU isn't all of a sudden going to be able to "out-stipend" UT, OU, or any other current power team in order to snag 5-star recruits.
     
  19. RubyClone

    RubyClone Active Member

    Mar 21, 2014
    3,111
    17
    38
    I meant to ask what you just addressed. If I go to nfl.com and purchase a Troy Polomalu jersey - does Troy get a little check for that sale? Or is it dispersed somehow equally? You're saying equally.... That's the only way I see this working in NCAA and not turning into a complete bidding war.

    And say we manage to get a kid who comes in under the radar and blows up into a top player - how does the transfer system not turn into a free agent market? Players are already transferring like never before. Money will only exasperate that further, and programs that develop players will be more apt to lose them.
     
  20. RubyClone

    RubyClone Active Member

    Mar 21, 2014
    3,111
    17
    38
    #20 RubyClone, Aug 7, 2014
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2014
    Well - that's what I'm asking. If there's a cap - that's some sort of equality. I'm not really seeing that in many discussions.

    Of course the cap has to be palatable by all institutions. ISU already is suffering in the money wars. Imagine the likes of the smaller conferences in D1
     

Share This Page