Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

Class of '66 Old Fart

California Thumbs Nose At NCAA

Recommended Posts

Personally, I think a lot of these players are truly that entitled. We aren’t taking about Kennesaw State or Ball State here. We are taking about the big schools. The P5 schools and the like. These players are getting their tuition paid for which can add up a hefty amount and some stay around for 5-6 years. They get a place to live. They get food. They get to travel across the nation and sometimes the world. They get elite training that’d cost a butt load for any average person. They get free marketing and branding that’d cost a butt load(will players pay the guys who make hype videos for them that boost their marketing and branding?), they get free gear(shoes, shorts, shirts, jackets etc.), they get free school tutoring. College athletes get a hell of a deal really. It’s on them to take advantage of it.

To another point, the players believe schools are making money because of them specifically. Well at these schools, like Indiana, they are making money because “Indiana” is on the jersey. If it were because of who was playing, Indiana would have lost a lot of money over the years. The players don’t understand the amount of loyalty that college fans have for the schools and that it’s the schools name that’s the most important thing, not the player.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still on the fence, personally. But if they start paying athletes I would like to see Trusts set up for them. Something that would pay them out a certain amount each year (distributes bi-weekly or bi-monthly, which is standard paycheck distribution practices) and upon graduation or turning 25, the remainder is distributed. Whether it's a lump sum or periodic thereafter, I don't know. But generally speaking, that's the setup I would prefer to see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Personally, I think a lot of these players are truly that entitled. We aren’t taking about Kennesaw State or Ball State here. We are taking about the big schools. The P5 schools and the like. These players are getting their tuition paid for which can add up a hefty amount and some stay around for 5-6 years. They get a place to live. They get food. They get to travel across the nation and sometimes the world. They get elite training that’d cost a butt load for any average person. They get free marketing and branding that’d cost a butt load(will players pay the guys who make hype videos for them that boost their marketing and branding?), they get free gear(shoes, shorts, shirts, jackets etc.), they get free school tutoring. College athletes get a hell of a deal really. It’s on them to take advantage of it.

To another point, the players believe schools are making money because of them specifically. Well at these schools, like Indiana, they are making money because “Indiana” is on the jersey. If it were because of who was playing, Indiana would have lost a lot of money over the years. The players don’t understand the amount of loyalty that college fans have for the schools and that it’s the schools name that’s the most important thing, not the player.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

Pretty rich call somebody entitled for wanting to make money for their own likeness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pretty rich call somebody entitled for wanting to make money for their own likeness. 

If players want to make money off of jersey sales and autographs then cool. Schools could easily get around that by selling jerseys with a number no one on the team has. Autographs would be on your own terms. The problem is that the players believe the schools are making money because of them and not because of loyal fans. Players come and go every year, yet Indiana still makes money. Kentucky has a different team basically every year and yet they still make money. Why? Because Kentucky is on their jersey. The fans(the ones who give their money up to watch) care more about the name on the front than on the back. Indiana was still Top 6 in revenue after a 6 win season. Was it because we were infatuated with the amazing players on the team or because we are loyal IU fans?


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still on the fence, personally. But if they start paying athletes I would like to see Trusts set up for them. Something that would pay them out a certain amount each year (distributes bi-weekly or bi-monthly, which is standard paycheck distribution practices) and upon graduation or turning 25, the remainder is distributed. Whether it's a lump sum or periodic thereafter, I don't know. But generally speaking, that's the setup I would prefer to see. 

I would like to know what people want these athletes paid and how much it should be regulated. How many schools can afford to pay what Louisville, IU, UK or North Carolina could pay? That’s the problem I see. A new league would have to be created. The NCAA could still technically exist with the schools that obviously couldn’t compete in the new league.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:


If players want to make money off of jersey sales and autographs then cool. Schools could easily get around that by selling jerseys with a number no one on the team has. Autographs would be on your own terms. The problem is that the players believe the schools are making money because of them and not because of loyal fans. Players come and go every year, yet Indiana still makes money. Kentucky has a different team basically every year and yet they still make money. Why? Because Kentucky is on their jersey. The fans(the ones who give their money up to watch) care more about the name on the front than on the back. Indiana was still Top 6 in revenue after a 6 win season. Was it because we were infatuated with the amazing players on the team or because we are loyal IU fans?


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

I agree with this. I have no problem with players being allowed to make money off their own likeness. I think California's law is the right move. If the demand is there for the athletes ten they can be compensated. My problem is with schools paying players salaries. I think that would be the wrong move. The vast majority of athletes aren't making their schools money. For every Zion or Tebow, there are dozens upon dozens of nameless cogs in the machine. An athletic scholarship is fair compensation for what most of them bring in. People might come because they want to watch the superstars, but most people come because they are fans of the school. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very pro-capitalism and free market. These kids have every right to make all the money they can from their skills, likeness, etc ......they do that by going pro. However, if they want to attend college and participate in amateur competition they gotta wait. It's not that complicated and the model worked fine for a very long time.

Playing college sports is not compulsory, so if you don't want the stipulation that come with it, don't play.   

I suppose High school kids deserve a percentage of the gate from Friday night's game too? Maybe the dance recital made enough from the bake sale that the girls deserve a cut? Sheesh. 

(btw I understand the NCAA is making a lot of $$ that isn't the point, to me it's principle not balance sheet) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the NCAA can’t have a rule saying players can’t be paid? Weed is legal in California yet you can’t smoke it if you’re in athlete in the NCAA or even in the NBA, NFL, MLB or NHL. And even if the NCAA does make changes, how much will change? If they start paying players, how much do the players get paid? Is it capped and regulated by the NCAA? Is it the same across all D1 schools? If you pay the men’s team do you have to pay the women’s team? Or do a bunch of schools leave the NCAA to go create a new league that still caps and regulates how much recruits are paid to keep an even playing field?


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

Joe, it’s a law to allow athletes in California to profit off of their likeness. No more. No less. The NCAA has rules against players getting paid. That’s the issue here. California said you can’t do that. Cat fight ensues. What in the hell does cannabis have to do with this discussion? Marijuana is still considered a performance enhancing drug. It shouldn’t be and it won’t be within five years. Completely separate situation. Has nothing to do with the legality of it.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:


I would like to know what people want these athletes paid and how much it should be regulated. How many schools can afford to pay what Louisville, IU, UK or North Carolina could pay? That’s the problem I see. A new league would have to be created. The NCAA could still technically exist with the schools that obviously couldn’t compete in the new league.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

A new P5 league would be created and the NCAA would fold like the cheap suit they are. Where’s their revenue coming then? The way they pick and choose punishments deserves an end only fitting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe, it’s a law to allow athletes in California to profit off of their likeness. No more. No less. The NCAA has rules against players getting paid. That’s the issue here. California said you can’t do that. Cat fight ensues. What in the hell does cannabis have to do with this discussion? Marijuana is still considered a performance enhancing drug. It shouldn’t be and it won’t be within five years. Completely separate situation. Has nothing to do with the legality of it.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Mary J is legal recreationally in Cali. I don’t think they consider it performance enhancing like HGH. Maybe they do? Would be odd I think. It only dulls the pain for a little bit. I could be wrong. I just don’t see how the new law gets around the NCAA rules. Seems like it would be something the Supreme Court would have to get involved in and deem unconstitutional to not pay the players. But then I think the Title IX stuff would be thrown in and it’d turn into an absolute mess. Which it’s a mess anyways but there are ways to fix it without completely destroying it.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, iubb said:

 

 


Lol. NCAA is as corrupt as FIFA.

Does the NCAA not remember that (last year) they used unpaid PRISON LABOR As one of their main arguments on why college athletes shouldn’t be paid.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

A  fair comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mary J is legal recreationally in Cali. I don’t think they consider it performance enhancing like HGH. Maybe they do? Would be odd I think. It only dulls the pain for a little bit. I could be wrong. I just don’t see how the new law gets around the NCAA rules. Seems like it would be something the Supreme Court would have to get involved in and deem unconstitutional to not pay the players. But then I think the Title IX stuff would be thrown in and it’d turn into an absolute mess. Which it’s a mess anyways but there are ways to fix it without completely destroying it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

https://www.usada.org/athletes/substances/marijuana-faq/

 

I recommend watching the news. There is a good reason why the NCAA didn’t come out with a heavy handed response to this law. They can’t do anything about it other than to determine a state is breaking the rules and suspend everyone.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
https://www.usada.org/athletes/substances/marijuana-faq/
 
I recommend watching the news. There is a good reason why the NCAA didn’t come out with a heavy handed response to this law. They can’t do anything about it other than to determine a state is breaking the rules and suspend everyone.
 
 
Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

It’s not like any Cali school are competing for national titles in either revenue sport.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s not like any Cali school are competing for national titles in either revenue sport.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Holy cow please tell me you don’t think this is the point.

I’m not even going to go dig it up, but think about the combined revenue for the NCAA from UCLA, USC, Stanford, SD State, and the bunch of other universities.

It’s significant even without them being championship contenders.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy cow please tell me you don’t think this is the point.

 

I’m not even going to go dig it up, but think about the combined revenue for the NCAA from UCLA, USC, Stanford, SD State, and the bunch of other universities.

 

It’s significant even without them being championship contenders.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

The point doesn’t fit the narrative so we are gonna shift the point.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy cow please tell me you don’t think this is the point.

I’m not even going to go dig it up, but think about the combined revenue for the NCAA from UCLA, USC, Stanford, SD State, and the bunch of other universities.

It’s significant even without them being championship contenders.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

It’s just a snarky comment because of how far teams like UCLA and USC have fallen.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Alford Bailey said:

A  fair comparison.

I hope this is sarcasm. Even if you think college athletes deserve compensation (obviously I don't) you can't seriously argue they are being abused and forced to perform against their will. That isn't just laughable it's insulting. College athletes can quit & drop out of school at anytime. Happens frequently. Even better- pay your own way like all the other schmoes. 

Why have Title IX to subject women to the same horrors men have to endure? If college sports are so corrupt and unfair why are kids lining up to participate? If NCAA sports are tantamount to slavery, shouldn't they all be shut down?

They are not professionals. If they want to be then fine- go to the NBA, China, Poland or wherever and get paid as much as you can. Don't want to do that? Then shut up your whining about how unfair the system is.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×