Anti-trust lawsuit against NCAA

[ORD_Buckeye]

Colter on Mike & Mike says it is not about pay to play, but a seat at the table. Medical coverage needs for injuries, graduating players and potentially dollars down the road to help. Not to affect non revenue sports at this time, only intended for football and basketball at this point. Talked a lot about the money being generated. Talked about having to schedule classes around football. Next step is Anti-Trust lawsuit to allow players to negotiate for other items that the NCAA rules keep them from. Argued that getting a scholarship was pay and that is what made them an employee. He believes that the NW players will vote to unionize. He also talked about "working conditions".

There's really nothing that can be done about graduation rates. Seriously? What more hand holding do they want? The die on most of these "student-athletes" has been cast before they even reach high school, and no amount of tutoring or "success centers" will change that. For Christ sake, we recently admitted that we brought football players in whose math and reading skills were at the third and fourth grade levels. You think those guys made it though even a sports management degree? You think they were capable of even benefiting from, much less competing at, a university that is currently rejecting students with 26 and 27 ACT scores? Let them go off an play minor league ball for a couple of years. It works in hockey, and it works in baseball. The only reason that it hasn't worked in basketball is a result of vested interests that channel these kids into a university rather than where they should be going. Let them major in football.......in a minor league.

Robert Klemko ‏@RobertKlemko 18h
Here's a UNC athlete paper from one of those bogus classes, via @BryanAGraham. This got an A-. Sad stuff. pic.twitter.com/LBMnUUaoSP

As for the ruling, what I found most interesting was the determination that their scholarships are income. Income is taxable. So, what is the annual Illinois, Cook County and City of Evanston tax tab on a year of full tuition, room, board and books at Northwestern? How many of those Florida players that we are recruiting are able to pay taxes on the roughly $30K that their out of state scholarship to Ohio State is worth annually? The players can't have it both ways. They can't demand that they are employees with all the rights that entails while denying that this benefit of massive value that the employer is giving them is not taxable income.

I honestly don't like the ruling, but--best case scenario--I see it as the messy catalyst for splitting the route to the NFL/NBA into two paths: a minor league path or a traditional scholarship path.

 

[BayBuck]

I think that OH10 sees things like I do. Football and, to a lesser extent, basketball, provide the financial foundation for all college sports. Pay for play or providing these benefits is going to cut into Title XI.

If we ignore the argument about whether or not that is the right thing to do, and consider what happens if they extract these benefits, then the discussion quickly changes to a market forces/market returns argument.

So, what gives? Goodbye women's sports in general? Hardly likely to get that through at state schools. University supports athletics from the budget, because they now run at a loss? Given pressures on rising costs of education, hardly likely. Goodbye small sports with little fan support? Probably the first kill and then a war over the rest.

Not saying that the players should or should not get more, just that this is a game changer of note. Things are most likely going to change in college athletics...big time.

Relating to the issues you mention, my understanding is that it still requires clarification as to whether the applicable "bargaining unit" will include only football players or all scholarship athletes at Northwestern--and what happens at the intersection of NLRA and Title IX? This can of worms has only just been opened.

 

[OH10]

It is routine for continuation of academic scholarships to be predicated on performance, such as on maintenance of a certain GPA. I would argue that is not appreciably different, in basic principle, from continuation of an athletic scholarship being based on athletic performance. There is one significant difference however. Maintenance of a particular GPA is a relatively objective criterion, whereas maintenance of sufficient athletic performance is probably typically much more subjective.

But the idea that, "we're pulling your scholarship because you're not who we thought you were when we offered it" is not unique to athletics.

The problem is that maintenance of an academic scholarship is objectively quantifiable. And they have virtually zero value to the university (i.e. they don't generate any substantial income). If the players desire to band together to protect each other and their scholarships, I have absolutely no problem with it. It's pretty damn American if you ask me.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

And if these players truly are employees, hired by the universities to play football with no obligation to take part in the student-athlete charade, I can't wait until the first one gets pissed at Boss Meyer, quits his job and runs off to take a job for the University of Michigan the next day.

 

[OH10]

I'm not sure even this clear cut example is quite as clear cut as you present it to be. When stores around Ohio and across the country sell a lot of OSU #5 jerseys, that is certainly due in part to Braxton Miller's performance. But isn't it also due to a significant extent to the Ohio State name brand? If Miller played instead for an AFL team (or some hypothetical developmental league that served as a legitimate alternative to CFB, which incidentally I support), would sales of jerseys with his name and number on them come anywhere close to the sales of OSU #5 jerseys? You could make a legitimate case that players should get a <100% percentage of sales of jerseys bearing their number. But I'm not sure it is clear cut how that should work. And I'd further argue that those players already get a benefit from playing in a league and for a team that has a unique market popularity. And I suspect that benefit could be lost to them if the factors which make the marketability of the product unique are trifled with.

The universities should sell generic numbers then that can't be easily traceable to the star player. Sorry, but by selling #5 jerseys, the intent to profit off Braxton's likeness is infinitely apparent.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

The problem is that maintenance of an academic scholarship is objectively quantifiable. And they have virtually zero value to the university (i.e. they don't generate any substantial income). If the players desire to band together to protect each other and their scholarships, I have absolutely no problem with it. It's pretty damn American if you ask me.

Jesus. Those kids on academic scholarships are the very reason for which the university exists. And at the graduate level, often those scholarship students are the ones who assist in the research and staff the labs that bring in 20x as much money to Ohio State than does the football program.

They represent the university's core mission far more than the 5* football player who reads at a fourth grade level, regardless of what income he might take a tiny part in generating, but at only the handful of schools that don't actually lose money and don't have to subsidize his sport from academics!

 

[jwinslow]

The universities should sell generic numbers then that can't be easily traceable to the star player. Sorry, but by selling #5 jerseys, the intent to profit off Braxton's likeness is infinitely apparent.

Or selling a video game with forty individual skill ratings (let alone exact Heights, weights, numbers and usually home States) to precisely mimic the real life player and make Mike Thomas a very different style of wideout from James Clark.

 

[OH10]

Jesus. Those kids on academic scholarships are the very reason for which the university exists. And at the graduate level, often those scholarship students are the ones who assist in the research and staff the labs that bring in 20x as much money to Ohio State than does the football program.

They represent the university's core mission far more than the 5* football player who reads at fourth grade level, regardless of what income he might take a tiny part in generating, but at only the handful of schools that don't actually lose money and don't have to subsidize his sport from academics!

And if those research students (who make so much money for the university) wanted to band together to protect academic scholarships, I'd have no problem with that either. But it is undoubtedly a different arena because athletes are expected to provide significant (and dangerous) extra labor OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM as a condition of their scholarship.

No one wants to acknowledge that. We just want these guys to go to practice, go to class, entertain us, and STFU about the rest. They don't owe me shit. I selfishly would love for them to be happy with the system as it is because I am, in fact, entertained. But I'm not going to hate the playa for playing the game everyone else in America gets to play ($$$$$).

 

[jwinslow]

The ncaa is a hypocritical, self defeating sham that dodges outrageous amounts of taxes (and salaries) with the blatant ruse of amateurism. Blatant exploitation and marketing of student likenesses are a backbone of the huge dollars flowing into this farce, meanwhile those kids are required (and essentially encouraged by toothless rule enforcement) to look elsewhere for money, usually under the table directly from University boosters or worse.


It's garbage but there is no useful alternative. It is rare for an athletic department to operate in the black and the few that do will disappear the moment they start paying players. It will either kill women's sports with an Avalanche of litigation to follow, or women will get to keep playing sports and most of the men's programs will be cut instead.


The only solution is a good enough band aid. Increase the stipend, allow deferred royalties on merchandise sales and provide some sort of bonus, like another four years of Healthcare or something else for pr purposes.

If you try to do what is right, it will bring the whole system crashing down and the only ones left standing will be the big revenue athletes that weren't playing school in the first place (Meanwhile the majority of the other sports would be toast, cutting the scholarships for the majority of the actual students getting athletic scholarship aid).

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

And if those research students (who make so much money for the university) wanted to band together to protect academic scholarships, I'd have no problem with that either. But it is undoubtedly a different arena because athletes are expected to provide significant (and dangerous) extra labor OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM as a condition of their scholarship.

No one wants to acknowledge that. We just want these guys to go to practice, go to class, entertain us, and STFU about the rest. They don't owe me [Mark May]. I selfishly would love for them to be happy with the system as it is because I am, in fact, entertained. But I'm not going to hate the playa for playing the game everyone else in America gets to play ($$$$$).

I'm not an apologist for the current system. I think it has to a great degree corrupted higher education in this country, and if I were named President of Ohio State, the first thing that I would do is take a fricking wrecking ball to the so-called "Younkin Success Center." And I'm no fan of the NCAA's hypocrisy. There's a reason that they were willing to come down so hard on the isolated Paterno scandal but don't want to touch the UNC revelations with a ten foot pole. They know the latter is happening at every big time college football and basketball program in the country and touches to the very heart of the whole bullshit facade of the "student-athlete."

What I oppose is giving these kids--many of whom should not be at Ohio State--a paycheck from the university. I'm against forcing universities, the vast majority of whom already subsidize their athletic programs to a scandalous degree, to compete with the Ohio States and Texasses of the world in this regard. I'm against having to gut the non-revenue sports (whose athletes are overwhelmingly real students) in order to cut these paychecks. I am, however, 100% for giving the football and basketball players a path to the pros--disassociated from any university--that does allow them to focus solely on football and earn a paycheck while doing so.

 

[OH10]

I'm not an apologist for the current system. I think it has to a great degree corrupted higher education in this country, and if I were named President of Ohio State, the first thing that I would do is take a fricking wrecking ball to the so-called "Younkin Success Center." And I'm no fan of the NCAA's hypocrisy. There's a reason that they were willing to come down so hard on the isolated Paterno scandal but don't want to touch the UNC revelations with a ten foot poll. They know the latter is happening at every big time college football and basketball program in the country and touches to the very heart of the whole bull[Mark May] facade of the "student-athlete."

What I oppose is giving these kids--many of whom should not be at Ohio State--a paycheck from the university. I'm against forcing universities, the vast majority of whom already subsidize their athletic programs to a scandalous degree, to compete with the Ohio States and Texasses of the world in this regard. I'm against having to gut the non-revenue sports (whose athletes are overwhelmingly real students) in order to cut these paychecks. I am, however, 100% for giving the football and basketball players a path to the pros--disassociated from any university--that does allow them to focus solely on football and earn a paycheck while doing so.

And I don't disagree with any of this. I support the players unionizing to lobby and bargain on certain issues; I think if they extend it further (while certainly their right), they run a significant risk of killing the golden goose that feeds so many scholar-athletes.

At the same time, we're talking about whether an identifiable group of people can organize to collectively bargain for the benefit of themselves and those similarly situated. I wholeheartedly support that. That's entirely American. I just hope they limit their demands and continue to see the forest from the trees.

Also: One thing I think that continues to get ignored here is that the NFL and NBA benefit substantially from this system. You want to protect the collegiate system AND pay players... put it on the NFL to draft them and pay them while they go to school. Stop pressuring the schools and put in on the owners of the pro leagues that (generally) enjoy a monopoly status in this country.

 

[DiamondBuck]

And I don't disagree with any of this. I support the players unionizing to lobby and bargain on certain issues; I think if they extend it further (while certainly their right), they run a significant risk of killing the golden goose that feeds so many scholar-athletes.

At the same time, we're talking about whether an identifiable group of people can organize to collectively bargain for the benefit of themselves and those similarly situated. I wholeheartedly support that. That's entirely American. I just hope they limit their demands and continue to see the forest from the trees.

Also: One thing I think that continues to get ignored here is that the NFL and NBA benefit substantially from this system. You want to protect the collegiate system AND pay players... put it on the NFL to draft them and pay them while they go to school. Stop pressuring the schools and put in on the owners of the pro leagues that (generally) enjoy a monopoly status in this country.

Just how would colleges force this on the NFL? Do you think the NFLPA would agree to cutting off a nice piece of the pie and handing it over to these kids? Would the NFL teams who drafted the players and are paying them get to decide where the kids go to school?

 

[zincfinger]

[Academic scholarships] have virtually zero value to the university (i.e. they don't generate any substantial income).

I would disagree with you there.

...it is undoubtedly a different arena because athletes are expected to provide significant (and dangerous) extra labor OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM as a condition of their scholarship...

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM, or what your point is there. But quite a few people who bring money to the university academically do so outside the classroom, e.g. from a laboratory.

The universities should sell generic numbers then that can't be easily traceable to the star player.

If your view is that Universities shouldn't derive income from athletes, I suppose that is true. But that's not my view nor is that the point I was addressing. I was addressing the question of why profits from jersey sales should more obviously be redirected to athletes' pockets than should, say, profits from ticket sales or from tv contracts.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Just how would colleges force this on the NFL? Do you think the NFLPA would agree to cutting off a nice piece of the pie and handing it over to these kids? Would the NFL teams who drafted the players and are paying them get to decide where the kids go to school?

Simply stop allowing the illiterates onto college campuses. The NFL would have to start up a minor league rather than see all that talent wasted. That's the "In A Perfect World" answer.

Putting it into practice would sadly be very difficult, for there's too many vested interests to fight against it. The college coaches and athletic complex want those kids on campus. The race hustlers would cry racial bias over any attempt to make fball and bball admissions anywhere close to normal student admissions or even non-revenue athlete admissions. And as you point out, the NFL and NFLPA like the current system just as it is.

I am hoping that, just maybe, the unionization thing causes the university Presidents to realize that such a separation's time has come. They can see their universities turned into sponsoring semi-pro teams or they can maintain some shred of integrity in college programs by allowing and forcing an alternate route for those who don't want to be on a college campus and often shouldn't be on one. I doubt it will happen, and it would be amazingly messy if it did. How do you tell an open admission university that they can't take the 4th grade reader? In a lot of cases, you might literally have to institute higher admissions standards for athletes than for normal students. Is that right? legal? I don't know. And God knows how the SEC and ESPN would fight it tooth and nail?

I think the greatest factor in making it work would simply be demand on the part of many athletes. Do you think that football player with the 3rd grade reading level, really wanted to come to Ohio State and struggle through the facade of maintaining his elibility in a sports management or phys ed major? A lot of these kids (not all by any means) would jump at the chance to "major in football" for 50K a year playing for the Reno Renegades or Tulsa Tornadoes. The league has to exist in the first place though.

 

[zincfinger]

The universities should sell generic numbers then that can't be easily traceable to the star player. Sorry, but by selling #5 jerseys, the intent to profit off Braxton's likeness is infinitely apparent.

I'm not sure if this was just a rhetorical point, but how would you implement a system in which only "generic numbers" are printed on jerseys? Should Universities be required to put out a list of star players every year whose numbers can't be printed on jerseys? Or should fans be forced to walk around with jerseys that have square-root-of-negative-one on the front (which would actually be kind of cool, so long as you didn't mind getting your ass kicked)?