Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 183
  1. #11
    I still believe. muskiefan82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,112
    In their drive to do something for some athletes (most have zero chance to make money off of this), will the courts (and the NCAA for NOT doing something earlier) effectively kill off intercollegiate athletics?
    We've come a long way since my bench seat at the Fieldhouse!

  2. #12
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,916
    Quote Originally Posted by muskiefan82 View Post
    In their drive to do something for some athletes (most have zero chance to make money off of this), will the courts (and the NCAA for NOT doing something earlier) effectively kill off intercollegiate athletics?
    I believe they could very well effectively kill of amateurism. College athletics will still be a thing, and to the casual observer may not really seam any different.

    I'm going to say what we all already know. If the NCAA is ruled to be in violation of anti-trust laws for the limits they put on what players are allowed to receive, and that the NCAA can no longer put limits on what schools can do to compensate players, then schools will begin to compensate players. OF COURSE they will! It may happen as soon as July.
    Last edited by xubrew; 12-18-2020 at 08:25 AM.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  3. #13
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,916
    Quote Originally Posted by STL_XUfan View Post
    The NCAA has been pretty dumb by not trying to get out in front of this (I guess they did add COL stipends a few years ago).

    I don't think players should be paid by the school outside of their scholarship and normal per diem money. However, I am all for them having unlimited NIL rights. If a car dealership is dumb enough to pay one of these players for an endorsement, more power to them. If the player wants to give private lessons to some rich booster's child, good on that player for getting some cash from someone that clearly has money to burn.

    My view is we should treat student athletes exactly the same as we treat a student at the school on a music scholarship.

    Yeah, it's EXTREMELY difficult to not be frustrated with all the morons in college athletics who insisted for years that this wasn't a problem, and that athletes shouldn't be paid, and who tried to double down and push back whenever issues of reform were brought up. Seriously, NICE GOING DUMBASSES!!

    I don't know how the Supreme Court will rule. They may uphold the previous rulings (which would be fine). They may rule even more in favor of the athletes. Or, they may overturn the previous ruling and rule with the NCAA. I could see it being anything. But it's not very encouraging when you see the NCAA lose case after case after case, and to see that pretty much the entire basis for their argument is "Well, we like it the way it is!" If they go to the Supreme Court with that, I think they lose. Again.

    The could have given players their NILs a long time ago. They could have given players in all D1 sports a share of the NCAA Tournament revenue a long time ago. They could have allowed for players to receive gifts from outside the university a long time ago. None of those measures would have created any extra expenses for the schools. If they had done that then we probably wouldn't be in a situation to where the Supreme Court may rule that schools cannot be restricted from paying players, which will basically turn recruiting into a bidding war and create all kinds of other consequences. But, the NCAA did none of those things. They, instead, doubled down. So...here we are.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  4. #14
    Sophomore XUGRAD80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,305
    If schools like Xavier start giving thousands of dollars to the athletes in revenue producing sports (Booker’s bill wants them to get 50% of the revenue), how will the school pay for the OTHER non-revenue sports? ( if they pay the guys, you know darn well they are going to have to pay the women equally! )

    It may not kill off men’s basketball or football at Power 5/6 schools....but I don’t see anyway for the other sports to continue as university supported programs. At best they will become “club” sports.

    Some of you may not care, but I personally think that it’s BS. I’d really rather see the schools drop football and basketball and let those all become professional only sports with no university affiliation. Use student fees, donations, etc. to support the other sports...where the majority of athletes are competing anyway. Don’t believe me, check this out....there are right at 90,000 college football and basketball players in NCAA schools. But there are almost 500,000 athletes participating in 24 separate NCAA sports total. A 4:1 ratio of non-revenue v revenue producing student-athletes. But here’s another fact...virtually every one of those revenue producing sports participants is on full scholarship. Hardly any of the others are on a full ride. Many aren’t even on athletic department rides.

    I just think that there is a great deal of value in participation in AMATEUR competition, where the goal isn’t to become a professional and earn a living that way. Where participating is done just for the shear JOY of competition. I’d hate to see that taken away from thousands and thousands just so a few hundred can get rich. Seriously, what the hell are we doing here folks!? People can’t see the forest for the trees.

  5. #15
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,916
    Quote Originally Posted by XUGRAD80 View Post
    If schools like Xavier start giving thousands of dollars to the athletes in revenue producing sports (Booker’s bill wants them to get 50% of the revenue), how will the school pay for the OTHER non-revenue sports? ( if they pay the guys, you know darn well they are going to have to pay the women equally! )

    It may not kill off men’s basketball or football at Power 5/6 schools....but I don’t see anyway for the other sports to continue as university supported programs. At best they will become “club” sports.

    Some of you may not care, but I personally think that it’s BS. I’d really rather see the schools drop football and basketball and let those all become professional only sports with no university affiliation. Use student fees, donations, etc. to support the other sports...where the majority of athletes are competing anyway. Don’t believe me, check this out....there are right at 90,000 college football and basketball players in NCAA schools. But there are almost 500,000 athletes participating in 24 separate NCAA sports total. A 4:1 ratio of non-revenue v revenue producing student-athletes. But here’s another fact...virtually every one of those revenue producing sports participants is on full scholarship. Hardly any of the others are on a full ride. Many aren’t even on athletic department rides.

    I just think that there is a great deal of value in participation in AMATEUR competition, where the goal isn’t to become a professional and earn a living that way. Where participating is done just for the shear JOY of competition. I’d hate to see that taken away from thousands and thousands just so a few hundred can get rich. Seriously, what the hell are we doing here folks!? People can’t see the forest for the trees.

    I share your concerns.

    I do not think the NCAA has any plans to change it's rule that says to be D1 in men's basketball that a school must field at least 14 total sports. So, not all of the non-revenue sports will disappear. But there could potentially be teams that do get cut so those expenses can be used to pay football and basketball players.

    And...that's one of my many frustrations. There were ways for athletes to receive money without it costing the actual schools a dime. That should have been allowed. I think that's pretty obvious now, BUT IT WAS OBVIOUS THEN TOO!!! I really believe that if it had been allowed (like it should have been) then there wouldn't have been this continued and constant push for more reform and it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court. Players would have been getting money in their pockets. They would have been happy. And, it wouldn't have had to cost the schools a thing!
    Last edited by xubrew; 12-18-2020 at 09:38 AM.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  6. #16
    Sophomore XUGRAD80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,305
    While I admire your optimism, I don’t share it. It just seems to me that there is an unbridled amount of greed on the part of some players and agents, combined with politicians that think they can win votes and support by supporting those parties, pushing this agenda. I don’t think that they will ever be happy until they get what they think is their “fair share”, no matter what collateral damage it costs to others. I blame part of that on players being feted, praised, and pampered from an early age. They grow up thinking they are God’s gift to the sport and that they should be treated accordingly. Really, if they have their education paid for, their room and board taken care of, and some spending money in their pocket, what more does a 20 year old college student really need? I’d guarantee that 99% of their fellow university attendees would be over the moon to just have all that. Trouble is that they have forgotten that it’s a privilege to be a college athlete, it’s not a right.

  7. #17
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,916
    Quote Originally Posted by XUGRAD80 View Post
    While I admire your optimism, I don’t share it. It just seems to me that there is an unbridled amount of greed on the part of some players and agents, combined with politicians that think they can win votes and support by supporting those parties, pushing this agenda. I don’t think that they will ever be happy until they get what they think is their “fair share”, no matter what collateral damage it costs to others. I blame part of that on players being feted, praised, and pampered from an early age. They grow up thinking they are God’s gift to the sport and that they should be treated accordingly. Really, if they have their education paid for, their room and board taken care of, and some spending money in their pocket, what more does a 20 year old college student really need? I’d guarantee that 99% of their fellow university attendees would be over the moon to just have all that. Trouble is that they have forgotten that it’s a privilege to be a college athlete, it’s not a right.
    Well, yunno, capitalism.

    It wouldn't shock me at all if the SCOTUS ruled that being able to pursue what they feel is their fair share is their legal right, and furthermore it is illegal for the NCAA and its members to try and systematically stop them.

    So, if that happens, then what is the NCAA's plan?? It's time to start asking that question in case it does happen. Because, it might happen. Just saying that we like things the way that they are may not work this time.

    While I don't entirely disagree with what you're saying, the problem is that isn't an actual legal defense in an anti-trust case. A lot of people would be over the moon if they just had the things that you had, or that I had, or that a lot of other people had. That doesn't mean that you don't have the legal right to try and get more things for yourself.
    Last edited by xubrew; 12-18-2020 at 10:13 AM.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  8. #18
    Sophomore XUGRAD80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    2,305
    Something being legal doesn’t mean it wise, or right. I’d hope that the court would take into account the long term effects of their ruling and how it will effect not just the plaintiffs, but many others. I suspect that they will do so, at least I hope they do.

  9. #19
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,916
    Quote Originally Posted by XUGRAD80 View Post
    Something being legal doesn’t mean it wise, or right. I’d hope that the court would take into account the long term effects of their ruling and how it will effect not just the plaintiffs, but many others. I suspect that they will do so, at least I hope they do.
    Something being legal doesn't make it wise or right, but something being legal does make it legal. If the court rules that players are being denied their legal rights to their fair market value and that the NCAA is in violation of anti-trust laws by limiting how much they are able to be compensated, then...well...that's kind of it.

    Now, maybe they won't. But, I'm kind of thinking they will. At the very least I think it is an extreme possibility. And, I really don't understand why it seemed like such an impossibility for so long to so many people that, quite frankly, should have seen this coming a long time ago.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  10. #20
    Sophomore MHettel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,101
    How bout this idea.

    No athletic scholarships. ever.

    Just make everyone a free agent and let schools bid on them. Open market baby! Pay em! And, let them sign endorsement deals and take cash from Boosters or whatever!

    And then they pay tuition, like everyone else.

    sounds fair, yeah?

    Yeah, would never happen.

    In all seriousness, I cannot get over the fact that there exists a quid pro quo in the current arrangement. A kid receives an offer of full tuition, room, board, fees and various other perks, in exchange for agreeing to play a game for a school. Offer also includes some limitations that come along with meeting the amateur criteria. Kid accepts offer. Nobody forced kid to take offer. Kid bitches about offer that 99% of other people would die for.

    College Sports will be changing. Not for the better in my view. All self inflicted.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •