NCAA in the Supreme Court

[3TrueFans]

It's embarrassing how many people are hung up on the notion that the only definition of "salary" is a paycheck.

This guy definitely offers to pay people by giving them a mention on his insta page.

 

[JM4CY]

If they change this, I hope there’s gonna be some kind of plan (which is unlikely). It’s gonna be one complete and major sh*tshow above all sh*tshows.

 

[Urbandale2013]

I think the whole thing is dumb. The bad actors frankly are the NFL and NBA. If people want to go get paid more power to them. They should be enabled to do so.

The thing is if you take off the top players and put them in a minor league system or straight to the pros does it really change the revenue for college sports. My thought is no. I’m more undecided about the name and likeness stuff but the strict paying of players is just an argument based on the idea that the players are driving the revenue and not the schools.

 

[DSMCy]

If I was an Olympic sports athlete, I would be a little nervous about this. You will see a lot of programs get cut.

How does NIL have anything to do with the AD budget?

 

[SCyclone]

I wonder what happened to that pair. I can only hope that Niang got a hold of them somehow and will figure a way to troll Hawks with them someday.

Would have been fun to have tossed them at the runt after they got boat-raced by Oregon.

 

[AuH2O]

If I was an Olympic sports athlete, I would be a little nervous about this. You will see a lot of programs get cut.

We might see conferences eliminate requirements for men's sports. That would pave the way to cut all men's sports except FB and BB. Then there would be some cuts to women's sports up to the point of Title IX compliance.

But you could also see a result not being that the schools are required to pay the athletes, but the NCAA simply can no longer A. Block the schools from paying players, and B. Stop players from getting paid for activities outside the school (i.e. endorsements/bag man $).

But either way, you probably do see cuts where they can happen to funnel even more dollars toward football.

 

[mwwbbfan]

This has been my biggest beef with people's arguments about the NCAA and compensation of athletes. Everybody wants to say the "NCAA" and "Schools" are making huge money off of the athletes, and never want to put names to it. When it comes down to it, it isn't really the conference commissioners, NCAA heads, School Presidents or ADs that are getting ridiculously rich off this. Or, more accurately, you could put a hard cap on salaries for all those people at $1 million/year and give all that money to the athletes and it will be almost meaningless money.

The coaches are the individuals you can point to and say they are ones getting rich off college athletes. The bottom line is most of us like our coaches, and don't want to accuse them of exploiting these kids. But if people are saying that college athletes are being exploited, you have to be willing to say their coach is exploiting them. The Jay Bilas stance that the players are being exploited, but it's by some mythical old white guy with a monocle in an ivory tower at the NCAA or Universities is idiotic. Why people think he's some voice of reason is beyond me when he wants the money to keep going to facilities and the coaches, the very people getting nearly all the money from the sports.

There is a conflict here too with law as it was ruled illegal when college basketball used to have the restricted earnings coach that was designed as an entry level position but had a cap on what they could earn and was consistent for all schools. The courts ruled that it was illegal to have that cap on earnings. Do not know the legalities of it, but know that happened.

 

[joefrog]

We might see conferences eliminate requirements for men's sports. That would pave the way to cut all men's sports except FB and BB. Then there would be some cuts to women's sports up to the point of Title IX compliance.

But you could also see a result not being that the schools are required to pay the athletes, but the NCAA simply can no longer A. Block the schools from paying players, and B. Stop players from getting paid for activities outside the school (i.e. endorsements/bag man $).

But either way, you probably do see cuts where they can happen to funnel even more dollars toward football.

How does the court simultaneously require Title IX compliance and athlete compensation?

 

[ScottyP]

How does NIL have anything to do with the AD budget?

I'm thinking beyond NIL. I think making the athletes paid employees will be soon after. The NIL is only a band-aid.

 

[heitclone]

When they are saying "sports" they basically mean football and mbb, it'll be interesting to see how this impacts the other sports.

 

[AuH2O]

How does NIL have anything to do with the AD budget?

I'd say in two ways. First, a NIL ruling against the NCAA essentially wipes away the amateurism argument, which should clear the way for schools to pay student-athletes if they want. It's clear this is being argued, with a fair amount of success, on the basis of collusion among schools. That would likely set the precedence that if a school wants to pay players directly, the NCAA can't stop them from doing so, and the schools can't collude and all agree to not pay players.

If for some reason, schools cannot or do not pay players directly, you'll see "have not" schools doing whatever they can to shovel money at the football and MBB programs to try to offset the value that some of the "have" schools provide to a player in terms of NIL. In other words, Zion going to Duke is much more marketable than Zion going to NC State. It might be a futile attempt, but I think they are going to have to try, or those schools' ADs are going to eventually die.

 

[joefrog]

The easiest solution is to remove any age cap or the one and done rule. Athletes can choose to go get paid if they wish. College? Well, you surrender your earning potential, not much different than many employment contracts. Heck, many times universities have a claim on any faculty inventions.

 

[joefrog]

When they are saying "sports" they basically mean football and mbb, it'll be interesting to see how this impacts the other sports.

There won't be other sports, that's the elephant in the room.

 

[AuH2O]

I think the whole thing is dumb. The bad actors frankly are the NFL and NBA. If people want to go get paid more power to them. They should be enabled to do so.

The thing is if you take off the top players and put them in a minor league system or straight to the pros does it really change the revenue for college sports. My thought is no. I’m more undecided about the name and likeness stuff but the strict paying of players is just an argument based on the idea that the players are driving the revenue and not the schools.

Also, for many players the college can add tremendous value to the athlete. I like the Zion example. Going into his freshman season, outside of Duke fans and basketball recruiting geeks, nobody knew or cared who he was. His time at Duke helped him build a huge brand and become incredibly valuable as soon as he could get endorsements. Had he gone straight to the Maine Red Claws, nobody gives a **** about him until he gets drafted. He makes a little cash, but probably delays and lessens his endorsements.

So the NBA 1 year rule is dumb, but guys that could go straight to the NBA if not for that rule don't choose the college route because they don't have a choice. They choose it because it can be the most lucrative path for them.

 

[ScottyP]

I'd say in two ways. First, a NIL ruling against the NCAA essentially wipes away the amateurism argument, which should clear the way for schools to pay student-athletes if they want. It's clear this is being argued, with a fair amount of success, on the basis of collusion among schools. That would likely set the precedence that if a school wants to pay players directly, the NCAA can't stop them from doing so, and the schools can't collude and all agree to not pay players.

If for some reason, schools cannot or do not pay players directly, you'll see "have not" schools doing whatever they can to shovel money at the football and MBB programs to try to offset the value that some of the "have" schools provide to a player in terms of NIL. In other words, Zion going to Duke is much more marketable than Zion going to NC State. It might be a futile attempt, but I think they are going to have to try, or those schools' ADs are going to eventually die.

agreed. This decision skips right past NIL and goes straight to paying players.

 

[joefrog]

This article is old, but still mostly works: https://www.swishappeal.com/2013/11/12/5090384/ncaa-womens-college-basketball-profits-donations

Average revenue: $1,475,197
Average expenses: $3,280,275
Average net revenue: -$2,329,623

None of the "big time" women's programs are in the black. The program that is the least in the red is New Mexico, the only school listed which is not in a power conference.

	Revenue	Expenses	Net Revenue	Contributions
Baylor
Connecticut	$4,704,571​	$6,037,412​	($1,332,841)​	$389,033​
Iowa	$761,941​	$3,932,286​	($3,170,345)​	$181,941​
Iowa St.	$850,536.77​	$2,823,446.78​	($1,972,910)​	$54,701​
Kansas St.	$294,215​	$2,698,929​	($2,404,714)​	$31,188​
Kentucky	$616,135​	$3,617,060​	($3,000,925)​	*
Louisville	$959,351​	$3,279,449​	($2,320,098)​	$193,074​
LSU	$571,004​	$3,743,747​	($3,172,743)​	$168,856​
Maryland	$668,528​	$2,904,054​	($2,235,526)​	$10,219​
Michigan St.	$876,379​	$3,504,478​	($2,628,099)​	$234,002​
Nebraska	$908,656​	$3,311,810​	($2,403,154)​	$50,959​
New Mexico	$754,080​	$1,745,921​	($991,841)​	$55,057​
Oklahoma	$2,720,788​	$4,962,681​	($2,241,893)​	$1,173,382​
Penn St.	$811,031​	$2,700,022​	($1,888,991)​	$270,788​
Purdue	$924,154​	$3,092,201​	($2,168,047)​	$402,060​
Tennessee	$4,538,252​	$6,586,982​	($2,048,730)​	$1,079,926​
Texas	$1,582,747​	$4,859,904​	($3,277,157)​	$512,907​
Texas A&M	$1,585,615.74​	$4,831,244​	($3,245,628)​	$39,127​
Texas Tech	$2,220,464​	$4,379,690​	($2,159,226)​	$1,264,750​
Wisconsin	$1,680,300​	$3,280,275​	($1,599,975)​	$1,108,999​

 

[AuH2O]

There is a conflict here too with law as it was ruled illegal when college basketball used to have the restricted earnings coach that was designed as an entry level position but had a cap on what they could earn and was consistent for all schools. The courts ruled that it was illegal to have that cap on earnings. Do not know the legalities of it, but know that happened.

Yeah, I don't think there necessarily should, or legally could be a cap. I just have a problem with clowns like Bilas thinking all these coaches are the greatest people on earth while simultaneously claiming athletes are being exploited.

 

[HFCS]

Is this the same case as JorBo's crusade?

It's just odd seeing it framed as a serious issue and not the complete clown show that is his social media martyr saga.

 

[Acylum]

Yeah, I don't think there necessarily should, or legally could be a cap. I just have a problem with clowns like Bilas thinking all these coaches are the greatest people on earth while simultaneously claiming athletes are being exploited.

Bilas is a smug prick who has always thought himself the smartest person in the room.

 

[cyfan92]

Convert all if the non-revenue producing sports to the academic scholarships and all of the problems are solved.