I don't know how the NCAA convinced so many athletes that they don't need paid. I was a paid Student Researcher. Not a big deal. Kept track of my hours, got a small check, and paid taxes like most of the rest of the country.
NCAA reacts to california athlete compensation bill
- Thread starter BoxsterCy
- Start date
I don't know how the NCAA convinced so many athletes that they don't need paid. I was a paid Student Researcher. Not a big deal. Kept track of my hours, got a small check, and paid taxes like most of the rest of the country.
Like that doesn't happen now?
The way to get rid of a black market is always to make it legal. Perhaps the league lays down some rules but they follow basic laws.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 41,085
- 29,238
- 113
- Mar 27, 2006
- 41,085
- 29,238
- 113
Yep. The "It leads to cheating" argument falls incredibly flat. The current system is already filthy with cheating. That's not going away no matter what they do. There's too much money involved. Once you acknowledge that truth, and it is the truth, then there's no good reason that athletes shouldn't be able to profit from their own image.Like that doesn't happen now?
- Mar 27, 2006
- 41,085
- 29,238
- 113
Olympic sports should be able to profit from their likeness if they are able.
I think my question was not related to the thread. The thread was on profiting from their image and likeness but my question was more related to should athletes be considered paid employees of the university. Two different discussions.
I do think the athletes should be able to profit from their image and likeness. I also think that many of the athletes will not see much of a windfall they expect from this. Unless they are getting money from boosters, many of the athletes won't see much money (exceptions being Zion Williamson, Trevor Lawrence and a few others). I could be wrong on the income potential though.
The bill isn't really intended to be the "fix", it doesn't even get into the details of how you would administer this to help police cheating or if you would cap the income somehow. It's a shot across the bow of the NCAA to get beyond their "work groups" and maybe do something beyond moving the three point line a foot back. BTW, it also allows the students to have a licensed agent. Probably a better idea than having families go underground to get professional advice or rely on some leach hanger-on to "advise" them.
From the bill:
"It is the intent of the Legislature to monitor the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) working group created in May 2019 to examine issues relating to the use of a student’s name, image, and likeness and revisit this issue to implement significant findings and recommendations of the NCAA working group in furtherance of the statutory changes proposed by this act."
From the bill:
"It is the intent of the Legislature to monitor the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) working group created in May 2019 to examine issues relating to the use of a student’s name, image, and likeness and revisit this issue to implement significant findings and recommendations of the NCAA working group in furtherance of the statutory changes proposed by this act."
The sooner California falls in the ocean and the NCAA is blown up, the better.
Eventually that 'beachfront property' I bought in Arizona a few years ago will be worth it!
- Mar 27, 2006
- 41,085
- 29,238
- 113
Well said. They're trying to force the NCAA's hand. The NCAA'S threat about championships is pretty hollow. There are something like 25 schools in California who have a D1 program in at least on sport. The NCAA may rattle their sabres, but they won't go through with their threat, especially not when the writing is already on the wall regarding player licensing. That's not the hill they're going to die on. This is about the NCAA trying to save face and arrive at whatever conclusion they get to on their own terms. It's all about framing the narrative. They don't want the perception to be that they were forced to make a change to their model, even though that's essentially what is happening.
The NCAA has been a shining beacon of hypocrisy for some time now. The millions of dollars generated by college sports has tainted nearly every facet of same, and the NCAA just isn't willing to admit how greedy they've been.
I think the players have every right to *****. If the NCAA - plus media, concessions, apparel companies, et al - profits from their efforts, why shouldn't the players be allowed to share in it? Might actually restore some transparency to the whole thing.
I think the players have every right to *****. If the NCAA - plus media, concessions, apparel companies, et al - profits from their efforts, why shouldn't the players be allowed to share in it? Might actually restore some transparency to the whole thing.
Because I was getting paid:
1. My tuition was paid for
2. My books were paid for
3. My housing was paid for
4. My meals were paid for
5. I got money to buy clothes
6. I received a pell grant for spending money
So even though I didn't get "straight cash", I still got paid.
And I got to play the sport that I love, even did it for a few years without 1 - 4 above.
How about the "elite" recruits and players for football and men's basketball (who we are really talking about here) all start going pro or into minor/developmental leagues somehow and skip college entirely. Say there are no more 5* players (roughly) in either sport because of that. Those guys are gone, and the remainder become student-athletes.
I am still going to watch Iowa State as much as I did beforehand even if we never have a guy like Lindell or Talen on the roster again because they are playing for money after high school. I think most college sports fans would feel the same way. The truly valuable thing with college sports is the game itself and the fan bases' connections to their schools, programs, and their traditions, not any particular set of athletes wearing the laundry that season.
Last edited:
How do you figure? If an athlete could sell their likeness I'd happily buy something for a few thousand to help them out, but as it is now I'll keep that few thousand so I don't get my school in trouble. "Here's $5000 for your autograph, thanks for coming to ISU. Let that star recruit your hosting next weekend know I treated you too."
And while my few thousand may not be a big deal there are others out there that will gladly increase my few thousand.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 41,085
- 29,238
- 113
You were compensated, but you weren't free to negotiate. The NCAA artificially limits what you can be compensated. If I apply for a job as a cashier at Lowe's, and they say they'll pay me $12 an hour, I'm free go to Menards or Home Depot, and apply to be a cashier there, where they might offer me $13 an hour or more. I'm free to weigh the benefits of each job, and even ask for more money, which the employer could agree to of they feel I'm worth it. Maybe I'm a great cashier or something. But in college athletics, the NCAA is there saying "All cashiers can only make $12 an hour. Doesn't matter which store you work at. $12 is the maximum.". That's inherently unfair. It's artificially limiting the cost of labor. And in the case of a sport like football, the NCAA effectively controls the only path to the NFL, so players don't really have any other choice than to submit to their rules.
There's a reason why the NCAA has formed their little groups to explore some of these areas regarding compensation rules. They know just as well as anyone else that they're going to have to change sooner or later. Just a matter of time.
Playing a sport in college is not a job so I don't know why we try to compare it to one.
