-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter CFPBuckeye
- Start date
ShowMeBuck
You know what? Chicken butt.
https://sports.yahoo.com/memphis-hi...seman-shows-times-have-changed-032452004.html
Interesting read in light of the Chase deal.
The NCAA is in a very tricky spot right now. They have control of a massively popular product in college sports that’s becoming restless.
Interesting read in light of the Chase deal.
The NCAA is in a very tricky spot right now. They have control of a massively popular product in college sports that’s becoming restless.
Upvote
0
ScriptOhio
Everybody is somebody else's weirdo.
Report: NCAA, allies spent nearly $1M lobbying lawmakers in 2019
The NCAA and allies spent just shy of $1 million in 2019 to lobby Congress to shape reforms regarding student-athlete pay to the NCAA's liking, the Associated Press reported on Wednesday. Per the report, the NCAA, Atlantic Coast Conference and Big 12 Conference spent a combined total of $990,000 in lobbying efforts over the course of the year as they seek restrictions on student-athletes profiting from endorsements.
The NCAA reportedly dished out $690,000 last year on in-house and outside lobbyists -- the most the organization has spent on lobbying since 2014. The ACC reportedly gave $210,000 to the law firm DLA Piper and another lobbyist, Tom Korologos, to influence Congress on “legislative and regulatory proposals affecting intercollegiate athletes."
The Big 12, meanwhile, paid lobbyist former Missouri Congressman Kenny Hulshof a total of 90,000. The Big 12 has worked with lobbyist Hulshof for several years, while 2019 was the first time that the ACC had ever hired lobbyists, per the report.
The NCAA has increasingly gravitated toward Congress as more states begin to introduce laws allowing players to profit from endorsement down the stretch. The first major domino fell in September when California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill to allow college athletes within the state to profit off their name and likeness, set to go into effect in 2023. The bill allows for-profit opportunities that range from endorsement deals to compensation for youth coaching opportunities. It does not, however, open the door for direct payments from universities before or during their time on campus.
(The Bill provides for a three-year implementation window," Newsom wrote. "If unintended consequences arise that negatively impact our colleges and universities, or our student-athletes, my administration will work constructively with the Legislature to address these issues.”
Connecticut U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy is among other notable politicians who have pushed for such legislation that would allow student-athletes to have profit from their image and likeness.
“The NCAA is a well-heeled organization and college athletes, not by accident, don’t have the kind of organizational power or influence that the NCAA does,” Murphy, a Connecticut said, according to the Associated Press report. “You have to be more assiduous in soliciting the opinion of athletes than you do the NCAA.”
In October 2019, the NCAA took the next step that would allow athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness, with the board of governors voting to allow each division to consider updating their bylaws and policies. NCAA president Mark Emmert said the goal was to create more opportunities for college athletes while still preserving amateurism.
“As a national governing body, the NCAA is uniquely positioned to modify its rules to ensure fairness and a level playing field for student-athletes,” Emmert said. “The board’s action today creates a path to enhance opportunities for student-athletes while ensuring they compete against students and not professionals.”
Ohio, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Kentucky, Nevada, New York and South Carolina are among other states with lawmakers that have introduced or plan to introduce bills aimed at allowing NCAA athletes to potentially profit off their name, image or likeness.
Entire article: https://247sports.com/college/ohio-...f4T8MMpRUuxGlvTYRG5crkgvqHAJHCh0mVWFxJ5gspbls
The NCAA and allies spent just shy of $1 million in 2019 to lobby Congress to shape reforms regarding student-athlete pay to the NCAA's liking, the Associated Press reported on Wednesday. Per the report, the NCAA, Atlantic Coast Conference and Big 12 Conference spent a combined total of $990,000 in lobbying efforts over the course of the year as they seek restrictions on student-athletes profiting from endorsements.
The NCAA reportedly dished out $690,000 last year on in-house and outside lobbyists -- the most the organization has spent on lobbying since 2014. The ACC reportedly gave $210,000 to the law firm DLA Piper and another lobbyist, Tom Korologos, to influence Congress on “legislative and regulatory proposals affecting intercollegiate athletes."
The Big 12, meanwhile, paid lobbyist former Missouri Congressman Kenny Hulshof a total of 90,000. The Big 12 has worked with lobbyist Hulshof for several years, while 2019 was the first time that the ACC had ever hired lobbyists, per the report.
The NCAA has increasingly gravitated toward Congress as more states begin to introduce laws allowing players to profit from endorsement down the stretch. The first major domino fell in September when California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill to allow college athletes within the state to profit off their name and likeness, set to go into effect in 2023. The bill allows for-profit opportunities that range from endorsement deals to compensation for youth coaching opportunities. It does not, however, open the door for direct payments from universities before or during their time on campus.
(The Bill provides for a three-year implementation window," Newsom wrote. "If unintended consequences arise that negatively impact our colleges and universities, or our student-athletes, my administration will work constructively with the Legislature to address these issues.”
Connecticut U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy is among other notable politicians who have pushed for such legislation that would allow student-athletes to have profit from their image and likeness.
“The NCAA is a well-heeled organization and college athletes, not by accident, don’t have the kind of organizational power or influence that the NCAA does,” Murphy, a Connecticut said, according to the Associated Press report. “You have to be more assiduous in soliciting the opinion of athletes than you do the NCAA.”
In October 2019, the NCAA took the next step that would allow athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness, with the board of governors voting to allow each division to consider updating their bylaws and policies. NCAA president Mark Emmert said the goal was to create more opportunities for college athletes while still preserving amateurism.
“As a national governing body, the NCAA is uniquely positioned to modify its rules to ensure fairness and a level playing field for student-athletes,” Emmert said. “The board’s action today creates a path to enhance opportunities for student-athletes while ensuring they compete against students and not professionals.”
Ohio, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Kentucky, Nevada, New York and South Carolina are among other states with lawmakers that have introduced or plan to introduce bills aimed at allowing NCAA athletes to potentially profit off their name, image or likeness.
Entire article: https://247sports.com/college/ohio-...f4T8MMpRUuxGlvTYRG5crkgvqHAJHCh0mVWFxJ5gspbls
Upvote
0
Shit for that kind of money they could have paid their way onto 3 DNC Debates and convinced us all why athletes shouldnt be compensated for time and skill.
Upvote
0
BigWoof31
"Barkin' up the wrong tree"
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...for-sixth-straight-year-to-lowest-since-1996/
College Football is looking at declining attendance for the 6th straight year. The article surmises that the wonderful TV product makes a huge difference in addition to the CFP.
If your team has 1-2 losses by November 1 and is effectively out of the playoff picture, the average fan is much more likely to stay home.
College Football is looking at declining attendance for the 6th straight year. The article surmises that the wonderful TV product makes a huge difference in addition to the CFP.
If your team has 1-2 losses by November 1 and is effectively out of the playoff picture, the average fan is much more likely to stay home.
Upvote
0
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...for-sixth-straight-year-to-lowest-since-1996/
College Football is looking at declining attendance for the 6th straight year. The article surmises that the wonderful TV product makes a huge difference in addition to the CFP.
If your team has 1-2 losses by November 1 and is effectively out of the playoff picture, the average fan is much more likely to stay home.
I fully expect this virus shit to still be ongoing... so we're about to sink wwaaaayyy below all those numbers.
Maybe we're about to see a new dawn of tv-centric sports in general.
Anxiously sitting here expecting the 10 or so concerts I booked to all get cancelled =(
Upvote
0
I think it has more to do with nearly everyone now having HDTV, many with 65+ inch screens, combined with the TV availability of so many games. Hell, since BTN went on air in 2007 I can't remember a single Ohio State game that wasn't available to watch on TV, in HD. And now with 70-85 inch HDTVs being dirt cheap (the Base Exchange had a 75-inch HDTV on sale for $499) and 4K models of those size becoming affordable, why would anyone but true die-hard fans who live near the venue choose to watch the game in person?
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
Yep.
If you go to the game, you're missing at least the second half of the noon games to get to the stadium. Pay $20 for parking. Let's say you paid face value for tickets - I don't remember what that is. $75 each? And you get an uncomfortable bench seat, the guy behind you keeps kicking you on accident, or he spills beer on you, or whatever. And if you want a beer, that's $10 each. And then you get to stand in line for the bathroom. And you want to watch a replay? Watch the scoreboard and see if they give a good angle of what you want to see. Then you get to fight traffic on the way home, and hopefully get home by halftime of the evening games.
Stay home, watch pretty much ALL of the noon games you want to see. You already paid for your beer (depending on what you drink, it's still way cheaper than $10 each), or whatever other snacks you want. You want to watch a replay? Just hit rewind. Need to go to the bathroom? No lines - just pause it and you won't even miss a play. And I'd hope your house is a lot more comfortable than the stadium is.
Nothing beats the atmosphere of being at the game. (Especially THE game.) But I think I'm happy going to 1-2 games per year, now. If stadiums want more people in them, they better start being more competitive.
Upvote
0
calibuck
Too soon old, too late smart
I'm certain many others have thought of this, but if the NCAA grants another year of eligibility to players, what about the kids coming in from high school. Schollie limit of 85 would have to balloon up, as (pick a number) 20 graduating seniors get another year of play, but that team has recruited 20 players to come in to fill those spots. Plus all the lost recruiting time. Maybe it's like the year that USA declined to go to the Olympics, those athletes lost (for many) their only chance to compete there. Am certain it'll all sort out, but there will be grousing for many a moon.
Upvote
0
I was thinking the same. Theyd pretty much have to allow the seniors who were allowed a extra year to not count toward any scholarship limit.
Upvote
0
sparcboxbuck
What happened to my ¤cash?
In the lacrosse world I can say that, while we’re all disappointed by the cancellation of our seasons... I think that we’ve all recognized that guys who are seniors are going to lose their final year of college ball. Even if it were offered, there’s a ton of these guys who have jobs already lined up and wouldn’t return if it were an option.
It’s sad but it is what it is.
There’s also a lot of talk about seniors who are losing a year. I think that there should be consideration of _all_ of the kids losing a year.
It’s sad but it is what it is.
There’s also a lot of talk about seniors who are losing a year. I think that there should be consideration of _all_ of the kids losing a year.
Upvote
0
If I was a sophomore or junior waiting for my turn to play, and the seniors were given another year I would be pissed.
Upvote
0