Possible news: NCAA split and Pac12 players strike

  • Fanatics -

    Thank you for your patience today and welcome to the newest version of Cyclone Fanatic!

    Most of the changes we have made are very simple, but will greatly improve your user experience while visiting the website.

    We have upgraded our forum software to speed things up. Our homepage is much cleaner and should be even more mobile friendly than before.

    We appreciate your loyalty and are committed to not only keeping Cyclone Fanatic in tip-top shape, but continuing to build this community for the next decade and beyond.

    We ask that if you are experiences any glitches to let us know in this thread . Will will be diligently working on the site all day.

    Thanks again.

    Chris Williams - Publisher

cyman05

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2010
1,972
106
63
Didn’t see anything posted on some major potential news:

1. Power 5 splitting from the NCAA to justify a football season? Some interesting quotes in here.

https://www.si.com/college/2020/08/01/power-5-exploring-staging-own-fall-sports-championships-2020

2. Supposedly a group of PAC12 players representing hundreds of players are going to sit out this year if there is a season to sit out of. Demanding 50% of revenues and no sports being cut. Not sure how that math is going to work especially heading into a year where AD’s aren’t sure how the budget is going to make it as is.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/08...-care-and-more/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

3. Bonus item: While looking at Jon Wilner’s news on the Pac12 he was saying the season is already looking a little dicey for the California schools. Will be interesting to see what develops and what happens if they don’t play.
 

VegasCy

Active Member
Dec 16, 2018
194
236
43
44
Seems extreme. I think the high bargaining power argument is a false argument. The schools have the power and these kids will suffer the consequences. I wish them well, but it would have been nice if they would have looked at their individual schools P&L statement before making such ridiculous demands.
 

Trice

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2010
2,910
2,809
113
Ankeny
We thought 2024 was supposed to be the big year for the future of college athletics. But whatever comes out of 2020 may turn out to be far more consequential.
 

BCClone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
Sep 4, 2011
30,152
22,184
113
North Iowa
Aren’t most PAC schools ADs basically broke. So, you win and get nothing, because schools would have to go D3 or something to survive.
 

Frak

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 27, 2009
7,975
1,968
113
Yeah, NIL and the transfer rule are already in the works. But neither will happen before January. Pretty much none of this can be done before the season (except Covid protocols) even if the schools agreed to it. If those players stand firm, the P12 is DONE. At least for this year. I think I'd tell the players they can sit out if they want, but their scholarships will go to someone else. What the players don't understand is that people root for the schools MUCH more than individual players. People will still watch CFB even if the top tier players aren't participating.
 

Frak

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 27, 2009
7,975
1,968
113
One thing I forgot to say, I think that the insurance point is a great idea. With all of the money schools make, they should have a policy for athletes the first few years out of school at least. Some of them have injuries that they'll have to deal with their whole lives.
 

ISUTex

Well-Known Member
May 25, 2012
2,884
1,862
113
Rural U.S.A.
I would tell those PAC 12 players to turn in their equipment and go get a job or take out a loan to pay for their tuition if they still want to attend college. 50%?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlpharettaCy

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
2,554
1,074
113
One thing I forgot to say, I think that the insurance point is a great idea. With all of the money schools make, they should have a policy for athletes the first few years out of school at least. Some of them have injuries that they'll have to deal with their whole lives.
Of the demands medical insurance might be an area they could negotiate.

6 years seems a bit long and schools might want to limit to coverage for sport related injuries.
 

JRE1975

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 12, 2006
1,340
820
113
Lakewood Ranch, FL
Title 9 is pretty straight forward, you have to provide basically the same benefits to both male and female athletes. It will never happen that one sport's athlete can demand more than another from the institution.

The "salaries" for each football player they want are about 50% of the basic rookie contract for the very few that make it after the first couple of rounds of the draft or camp invites, and most of them wash out in 2 years or less. For Iowa State it would be about $30 million a year based on the number they have computed, just for the football players.

Last but not least, they want to use agents and let them pay them money while they play in college. I think players are over estimating how much money all but the big stars are going to make with this likeness issue.
 

ISUTex

Well-Known Member
May 25, 2012
2,884
1,862
113
Rural U.S.A.
NFL players have to play for 5 years to get post career insurance.

Washington State has cut the players that signed off on this.
 

BCClone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
Sep 4, 2011
30,152
22,184
113
North Iowa
If they are striking, does it matter?

Label it as dumb but no response, classic. If you don't plan to play and they still give you your scholarship, I don't see what the player is losing. Why would a coach want players in the locker room possibly spreading Covid, taking up locker space and other things when they say they don't plan to play and are going to strike. Doesn't really make any difference if you are on the team or not.
 

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
12,768
5,427
113
If they want 50% of the revenue, they better plan for losing other amenities to offset that. Even if an AD could afford that, it's going to mean the players losing their scholarship and paying tuition out of their own pocket. Plus, all those practice facilities and special dorms and rent subsidies are gone.

It isn't like the AD's are just pocketing this money. They're distributing a huge amount back to those players.
 

Frak

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 27, 2009
7,975
1,968
113
If they want 50% of the revenue, they better plan for losing other amenities to offset that. Even if an AD could afford that, it's going to mean the players losing their scholarship and paying tuition out of their own pocket. Plus, all those practice facilities and special dorms and rent subsidies are gone.

It isn't like the AD's are just pocketing this money. They're distributing a huge amount back to those players.
So if FB players are going to get 50% of the FB revenue, does that mean that the soccer athletes have to pay in at the end of every year? Because they sure don't make any money. Pretty obvious that FB is paying the bills for all of the other sports outside of MBB. Some of these demands are not very well thought out.
 

Frak

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 27, 2009
7,975
1,968
113
Of the demands medical insurance might be an area they could negotiate.

6 years seems a bit long and schools might want to limit to coverage for sport related injuries.
Things are trending toward more support and freedom for players. It is probably an attempt to give in on minor things in lieu of paying them. I think that (in a normal year) schools are making enough money to offer insurance. Seems like the right thing to do. If I were in charge, I'd say 4 years and you have to graduate to be eligible. Maybe years 5 and 6 they have to pay in a premium to stay on the plan.
 

simply1

Rec Center HOF
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 10, 2009
18,625
8,994
113
Pdx
Label it as dumb but no response, classic. If you don't plan to play and they still give you your scholarship, I don't see what the player is losing. Why would a coach want players in the locker room possibly spreading Covid, taking up locker space and other things when they say they don't plan to play and are going to strike. Doesn't really make any difference if you are on the team or not.
It's dumb because people and I assume players strike to negotiate and return to the "jobs". Are you that clueless on strikes? They didn't "quit".
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron