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

SpokaneCY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 11, 2006
12,842
7,973
113
Spokane, WA
It’s a terrific idea. It’s like someone in mid-management asking for 3X pay raises when the company is on the eve of bankruptcy.
I'm involved in lots of negotiations and when someone opens with an absurdly high, or absurdly low opening it simply signals ignorance. It also makes it an adversarial approach vs. a value-add approach. Savvy negotiators (not including me in that category) generally eat these guy's lunch...

Personally I'm on the look-out for a local non-scholarship D3 program to start following. Quickly losing interest in major "college" sports.
 

SpokaneCY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 11, 2006
12,842
7,973
113
Spokane, WA
I see a bunch of entitled college kids who have been watching a little too much TV.
Thinking of the generation that wanted accolades and trophies absent work and success... We're ALL winners!!!!!!! You get a trophy! You get a trophy! 3rd string long-snappers get a trophy! I'm the 35,000th best ISU fan and I want JP to give me an award at mid-field!
 

SpokaneCY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 11, 2006
12,842
7,973
113
Spokane, WA
Meanwhile I see a bunch greedy TV execs and college administrators who are exploiting the labor of young men for their own personal benefit.
When a scrub football player who will never get game-day snaps believes he should be paid more than working men and women well into their careers, there is a disconnect.
 

BMWallace

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
Sep 11, 2011
516
586
93
Buffalo, NY
Devil's advocate: So why do they sign the LOI's if they're being exploited? For 98% of student athletes, they're getting more benefit than they're bringing in TV and gate revenue. For the other 2%, they're getting exploited by the collective bargaining agreements in the NBA and NFL, not the NCAA.
They sign the LOIs because that is what the system is designed to have them do. If they want to go pro, then the only option typically presented to them is college. We are talking about 17 and 18 year olds. They lack the knowledge or experience to know if this is their best option. And usually their only advocates are their parents/guardians who aren't any more familiar with the system then the students. They aren't allowed to hire an agent who has working knowledge of the college athletics system. Someone who can advise and advocate in the best interest of the player.

I look at international soccer as good comparison. Players can be signed to professional club contracts when they are still young. They are allowed representation and are given compensation as they are trained and brought up through the youth/developmental systems. The NFL (and the NBA before the G-League) does not have a developmental system because they were able to build on the convenient system of college football that already existed. The colleges took on all the risk of developing these young players, at the cost of only a tuition and board. Then, with the boom in broadcasting and advertising rights, everyone was able to reap those reward except the athletes. Their compensation is still limited to a scholarship. Wait, they get food now, so that totally makes up for it!

The LOIs, similar to student loans, are a pretty shady practice. Young men and women are being told that this is in their best or only choice by people who are not looking out for the students best interest.
 

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
2,554
1,074
113
College athletes welcome to the real world. Entry level employees in almost every industry don't make their fair share of salary, regardless of how talented they are. A recent college graduate in business, engineering, software developers, medicine. law, etc. can all be underpaid versus what they contribute from a work product standpoint.

Evan in professional sports, the elite athletes like Mahomes, Elliott, Gurley, Wilson, etc. don't make their rightful salary until their 2nd contract.

These demands of college athletic programs seem to ignore a couple overriding principles:
  • Title IX requires that schools have proportional mens/womens athletic scholarships to their undergraduate enrollments. The 2 sports that generate profits for an athletic department subsidize every other sport. So revenue generated by 100 men, support the educational and sport opportunities proved to 200-300 other student athletes
  • Each athlete whether their sport generates revenue or not, receive the core benefit of a college scholarship, housing, food, etc. Plus each athlete, regardless if they are 1st team All-American or last guy on the bench receive the same benefit from the school.
  • The money in college athletics is largely a result of the names on the front of the jersey and the affinity that college graduates and people within the state have for their schools. Sure winning brings in more money to a school (which is based on individual athlete ability), but those revenue streams largely continue after the athletes graduate.
The NCAA isn't without blame. IMO they have allowed universities to put $ before the kids long term benefit. The Kentucky basketball model is a prime example. Since Coach Cal has been at Kentucky, their basketball program has been a NBA minor league program and not a way for college athletes to receive a degree. Kentucky basketball is at the extreme, but most every university puts athletics in front of academics. The great Coach K and Duke have comprised their great university by taking one & done players vs. focusing on 4 year players who would leverage a Duke diploma in the workplace.

Part of the solution is allowing players to leverage their image and likeness. Part of the solution is making sure a college scholarship covers reasonable room, board and living expenses.
But a bigger part of the solution is colleges bringing some academic integrity back to college athletics. How often do we hear about athletes today being academically ineligible? Very seldom.

Asking for medical insurance after they playing careers has merit. It is eye-opening that none of their demands focused on academics. Like requiring schools to pay for college classes until the athlete graduates. The last figures I saw, a college graduate earns $1,000,000+ over their career than a HS graduate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeremy

Jeremy

CF Founder
Staff member
Bookie
Feb 28, 2006
15,746
5,966
10,030
Waukee, IA
Price and value are NOT the same thing. These educations are not worth much to the average athlete. Plus they hide the real price by offering all kinds of rebates (called scholarships for schools) and other discounts.
Ok, then have them start paying for attending the school and then we can use that money as a pool to equally pay all athletes. They can pay in 20k per year and earn 20k per year. We get back to net zero.
 

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
2,554
1,074
113
Yes, sports like golf, tennis, gymnastics, wrestling, etc. all cost the athletics departments more money than they bring in. And if given the opportunity, I wholeheartedly believe there are administrators who would happily cut those sports if they were allowed to. But in order to be eligible as a D1, the school must have 14 scholarship sports: 7 mens and 7 womens, or 6 mens and 8 womens. Of those at least 2 of them must be team sports for each gender.

The main reason schools hold on to sports like swimming and cross country is to maintain their status as D1, and ensure they can keep bringing in the money from football and basketball. The athletes in these sports bring value to the schools, even if that value isn't from direct revenue. As such they should still be compensated.
The reason schools hold onto those sports isn't their D1 classification, it is because of Title IX. The Federal Government requires that schools provide proportional academic opportunities for women as they do men.
 

Jeremy

CF Founder
Staff member
Bookie
Feb 28, 2006
15,746
5,966
10,030
Waukee, IA
This whole issue hinges on the fact that the scholarship and all of the other benefits that college football (and to a lesser extent basketball) players are being given does not equal that revenue that they generate for the institutions that they play for.

Since the explosion of the TV revenue in college sports starting in the 90s, and ballooning over the last 3 decades, the compensation that the players are receiving doesn't match up with what their hard work brings in. Meanwhile, coaching salaries and athletics department budgets have grown to absurd levels, to the point that in 40 states the highest paid government employee is a college football or basketball coach. (https://fanbuzz.com/national/highest-paid-state-employees/)

And not only are the players not compensated fairly for the value they bring, they assume a high degree of risk to do so. More and more information about CTE and long term brain injuries is coming to light every year. They risk life long joint and soft tissue damage. While not receiving anything for taking on that risk.

Many of these players also come from poorer, single income homes. Often these young men are responsible for putting food on the table, or helping to raise siblings before they go to college. And they are being asked to stop supporting their families for 4 years, and the only compensation is the potential of a degree at the end of that time. This is often where the dark money in college sports comes in. Sure, there are the bidding wars for the likes of Cam and Zion, but many times a guy just needs a few hundred dollars to help his mom keep the lights on at home for a few months. (https://www.bannersociety.com/2014/4/10/20703758/bag-man-paying-college-football-players)

That was all true before Covid. Now, the athletes are being asked to take on the additional risk of a potentially life-threatening or life-altering illness. One that also has the potential to take away the very scholarship that they are being asked to play for.

This is a labor dispute, just like teacher or auto workers strike. The disparity in value of labor versus the compensation offered has reached a critical point. Either the controlling powers offer more to the labor force, or the laborers must ban together and hit those in control by affecting the product being offered.
I understand that, but then all pretense of them being students first needs to go away. Either they are paid athletes that happen to go to a school or they are paid to go to the school and happen to play ball.

People seem to think that this will be good for the sports but it will ruin more programs than Covid could and raise ticket prices by multiple factors.

Pay to go to school and get paid for playing ball or have your education paid for and have a night job like many athletes and students.
 

cyfan92

Well-Known Member
Sep 20, 2011
1,863
2,368
113
Augusta National Golf Club
College athletes welcome to the real world. Entry level employees in almost every industry don't make their fair share of salary, regardless of how talented they are. A recent college graduate in business, engineering, software developers, medicine. law, etc. can all be underpaid versus what they contribute from a work product standpoint.
...
You are 1000% correct about corporations pay. Only C-suite level or even the CEO are paid "market value".
 

CTTB78

Well-Known Member
Apr 7, 2006
9,540
4,490
113
I'm involved in lots of negotiations and when someone opens with an absurdly high, or absurdly low opening it simply signals ignorance....
Exactly. When I saw what these west coast kids where 'striking' for I thought it was absurdly high. With the limited negotiating power these players have, ask for something that you may be able to attain instead of these ridiculous demands that are sending some packing.
 

SpokaneCY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 11, 2006
12,842
7,973
113
Spokane, WA
Exactly. When I saw what these west coast kids where 'striking' for I thought it was absurdly high. With the limited negotiating power these players have, ask for something that you may be able to attain instead of these ridiculous demands that are sending some packing.
I'm cool with the Covid stuff... I can conceptualize the insurance. The rest of the stuff???? I may just go down to the local park and watch little leaguers play - if it wasn't for the restraining order... :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: aauummm

simply1

Rec Center HOF
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 10, 2009
18,740
9,055
113
Pdx
I understand that, but then all pretense of them being students first needs to go away. Either they are paid athletes that happen to go to a school or they are paid to go to the school and happen to play ball.

People seem to think that this will be good for the sports but it will ruin more programs than Covid could and raise ticket prices by multiple factors.

Pay to go to school and get paid for playing ball or have your education paid for and have a night job like many athletes and students.
Are coaches teachers?
 

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
12,797
5,456
113
So I'm starting to come around on this. There has been a lot made about the money, but that's not really the Crux of their argument. They want a voice in decision making, especially in this pandemic. Truthfully, if they didn't include the demands for the revenue and the accompanying study, I think they would have had full public support. But most, including myself, latched on to that big revenue sharing number and didn't look at the rest of their statement. Their argument is about safety and some sort of representation in those decisions. Let's start there and then figure out how the money can work.

My biggest complaint still is that they're focused solely on football. This needs to be a much broader change than just football to succeed.
 

rochclone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jan 28, 2009
3,051
2,370
113
So I'm starting to come around on this. There has been a lot made about the money, but that's not really the Crux of their argument. They want a voice in decision making, especially in this pandemic. Truthfully, if they didn't include the demands for the revenue and the accompanying study, I think they would have had full public support. But most, including myself, latched on to that big revenue sharing number and didn't look at the rest of their statement. Their argument is about safety and some sort of representation in those decisions. Let's start there and then figure out how the money can work.

My biggest complaint still is that they're focused solely on football. This needs to be a much broader change than just football to succeed.
Their argument is about money. Many of the protections from CoVid already exist. They want to limit coaching salaries at a million dollars. I wonder if they are willing to limit what they make as professionals at a million dollars as well.
The players completely misunderstand their bargaining position in this situation. The players need the opportunities that a scholarship presents to them. If it is minor leagues only then only 15% of the players that currently have a Div 1 scholarship will be paid. Opportunities lost for the other 85%. Fans love their team not the individual players and TV ratings support that. Give the players name, image and likeness and they will understand quickly how much they have overvalued themselves.
 

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
12,797
5,456
113
Their argument is about money. Many of the protections from CoVid already exist. They want to limit coaching salaries at a million dollars. I wonder if they are willing to limit what they make as professionals at a million dollars as well.
The players completely misunderstand their bargaining position in this situation. The players need the opportunities that a scholarship presents to them. If it is minor leagues only then only 15% of the players that currently have a Div 1 scholarship will be paid. Opportunities lost for the other 85%. Fans love their team not the individual players and TV ratings support that. Give the players name, image and likeness and they will understand quickly how much they have overvalued themselves.
Their argument is that rather than cutting sports, coaches and conference administrators should take significant pay cuts this year to meet the budget shortfalls. I haven't seen those proposals as a permanent solution, just a short term thing. One that has already been done by many coaches around the country.
 

rochclone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jan 28, 2009
3,051
2,370
113
Their argument is that rather than cutting sports, coaches and conference administrators should take significant pay cuts this year to meet the budget shortfalls. I haven't seen those proposals as a permanent solution, just a short term thing. One that has already been done by many coaches around the country.
This isn’t a one year thing, the proposals are for a permanent change. You think they just want 50% of the revenue from football for this year? Give me a break. The players want to limit salaries of coaches and essentially have the 2nd string linebacker make more money then the assistant coach who is teaching them.
 

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
12,797
5,456
113
This isn’t a one year thing, the proposals are for a permanent change. You think they just want 50% of the revenue from football for this year? Give me a break. The players want to limit salaries of coaches and essentially have the 2nd string linebacker make more money then the assistant coach who is teaching them.
I've already said that the 50% proposal is ridiculous. But your pulling the coaches salaries comments from sections talking about avoiding cuts in programs in response to the pandemic and then applying it to a different topic of revenue sharing.

But if you read articles outlining what they want and not just headlines, the 50% revenue was just a single bullet point in a long list of issues ranging from health insurance to guaranteed scholarships to transfer rules.
 

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron