Should semipro/college players be paid, or allowed to sell their stuff? (NIL and Revenue Sharing)

[MililaniBuckeye]

Excellent read

CBS--

"There is an awful lot of righteous indignation floating around college football lately. A man spending the next 20 years of his life in federal prison for fleecing investors out of more than $900 million says he gave some money and benefits to some Miami Hurricanes over the last 10 years. I'm not interested in talking about what did or didn't happen. I'm not interested in confirming or denying the spiteful ramblings of an insecure snitch with an inferiority complex. I'm interested in talking about hypocrisy."

So, the thousands of documents validating a shitload what this "insecure snitch" says doesn't matter? The fact he gave tainted money to players makes it now OK for those players to have taken it? Really?

"The NCAA and ESPN are going to be telling you that some great kids are scumbags because they allegedly broke rules designed to keep them poor and implemented by people making money hand over fist. An ESPN shill in a $5,000 suit is going to ask you to morally condemn the kids who provide the framework for said shill to make enough money to afford that suit because those kids might have taken some free food and drinks. They're going to be called 'cheaters' despite the obvious fact that boat trips don't make you run any faster or hit any harder."

Give me a fucking break. The rules aren't designed to keep players poor. They are designed to prevent exactly what happened...a renegade booster running amuck, luring top-level players to a university with cash, gifts, drugs, and sex. "Free food and drink"? Those kids got a lot more than a free Big Mac meal. And the boat trips weren't intended to make players faster or hit harder, but rather to lure players to Duh U.

For a guy whom the article called very bery bright, this guy seems either defensive, gullible, or flat out stupid.

 

[osugrad21]

For a guy whom the article called very bery bright, this guy seems either defensive, gullible, or flat out stupid.

In my opinion, he has an intelligent angle that was presented well. You may not agree with him, but I see plenty of valid points in his argument that do not lead to a label of defensive, gullible, or stupid.

 

[Thump]

Freshman ineligibility is sounding more appealing to me.

 

[Gatorubet]

The difference, as far as I can tell, is that the NCAA has done a wonderful job duping people into believing this multibillion-dollar-a-year industry is pursued for the sake of amateurism. It's a total sham. The coaches aren't amateurs, the administrators aren't amateurs, the corporate sponsors and media companies that make hundreds of millions of dollars a year on the backs of these players aren't amateurs. The only 'amateurs' involved are the guys doing all the work. Pretty nice racket if you can get it.

The hypocrisy is self evident. What it ignores is the kids who compete at loads of schools who never will have a shot at the NFL, or selling a jersey, or being on TV. They do - in fact - operate for a free ride. They do - in fact - play for the love of the game knowing they will never have a whiff of a chance to make a buck at it, save the scholarship money they receive for tuition, housing and a meal plan.

So it is not so much that one side or the other is wrong - its just that the two environments are not equal - and never have pretended to be equal. Big time athletics in major college sports powers has been crooked since the day it began. The major problem is in figuring out how to justify paying one group when there is no way the other group can afford to keep up. What to do about amateur athletics when you do have amateurs - but there are also professional schools in amongst them?

 

[BUCKYLE]

The Olympics seem to do just fine.

You let the people able to profit from endorsements do so.

Most tOSU players, even second stringers, could make money off a jersey while they're in school. Their earning power decreases every year they're out of school.

The real shitty part is that a lot of these institutions of higher learning have no problem admitting people otherwise unable to attend said institiution all in the name of money. They only want them to stay elligible while they earn.

 

[HineyBuck]

Interesting study by the National College Players Association:

The Price of Poverty

 

[ScriptOhio]

Just wondering....

Do the schools get paid when their mascots are used in an ESPN commercial?

Do the students in the mascot costume get paid by ESPN and/or does ESPN at least cover their expenses?

My guess is that some money changes hands, at least for expenses, etc.

If so, the student in the macot costume gets money; however, a football player can't do the same thing (i.e. receive expense money for an appearance at a charity event).

 

[Buckeye Maniac]

Interesting study by the National College Players Association:

The Price of Poverty

Found an article that provides a good summary of the study.

LINK

The study, entitled "The Price of Poverty in Big Time College Sport," shows that the average scholarship shortfall (out-of-pocket expenses) for each "full" scholarship athlete was approximately $3,222 per player during the 2010-11 school year. The report also found that the room and board provisions in a full scholarship leave 85% of players living on campus and 86% of players living off campus living below the federal poverty line. The study estimates the fair market value of the average FBS football and basketball player to be $120,048 and $265,027, respectively.

 

[BUCKYLE]

Found an article that provides a good summary of the study.

The report also found that the room and board provisions in a full scholarship leave 85% of players living on campus and 86% of players living off campus living below the federal poverty line.

LINK

It would be funny if it wasn't so fucking absurd.

 

[Jake]

The Olympics seem to do just fine.

You let the people able to profit from endorsements do so.

Bingo. I said the same thing in one of the other threads - I think it was the Yahoo one.

The vast majority of players are never going to be offered a dime. The ones who do receive such benefits usually are marketable enough to do it legitimately if they were allowed. Given the money the schools make on selling jerseys with no name on the back - but everyone knows who it is - that is only fair.

I would apply that rule to every sport - if you can sell yourself, go for it. Sign that endorsement deal. That avoids equality issues, etc. in favor of a market based solution.

 

[MaxBuck]

Bingo. I said the same thing in one of the other threads - I think it was the Yahoo one.

The vast majority of players are never going to be offered a dime. The ones who do receive such benefits usually are marketable enough to do it legitimately if they were allowed. Given the money the schools make on selling jerseys with no name on the back - but everyone knows who it is - that is only fair.

I would apply that rule to every sport - if you can sell yourself, go for it. Sign that endorsement deal. That avoids equality issues, etc. in favor of a market based solution.

God help me. I agree with everything Jake says.

 

[BUCKYLE]

Bingo. I said the same thing in one of the other threads - I think it was the Yahoo one.

The vast majority of players are never going to be offered a dime. The ones who do receive such benefits usually are marketable enough to do it legitimately if they were allowed. Given the money the schools make on selling jerseys with no name on the back - but everyone knows who it is - that is only fair.

I would apply that rule to every sport - if you can sell yourself, go for it. Sign that endorsement deal. That avoids equality issues, etc. in favor of a market based solution.

Exactly. Not only that, but the fact that every week, tOSU players, amongst plenty other teams, are walking billboards for Nike (Oregon), Under Armor (Maryland), Gatorade (UF), and probably others that I can't think of off the top. In some cases, profits from those "sponsors" directly benefit competing schools. It's ridiculous that former Buckeyes like Orlando Pace and Eddie George have inderectly helped Oregon buy players from Texas, yet weren't able to sell their own autograph for ten bucks a pop.

Imagine a guy like...Mike Collins, from Newark. At one point he was a three and a half year starter/team captain that could've made a few bucks selling his sig at an NCAA approved function that could've been monitored by an NCAA compliance guy, where you charge ten bucks an autograph. No boosters funneling big money. Now he's a Licking County Deputy. No shame in that at all. Honorable and so forth...but...how much do you think he could hawk his sig for now? The NCAA's rules prevented him from capatalizing on his celebrity, local as it may be, during the only period he could earn anything from it.

 

[BrutusBobcat]

Probably what you do is slowly loosen the rules and see what effect it has. Part of what will change that is superconferences. Right now, the small schools who can't drum up a lot of autograph sales or who don't sell a lot of jerseys aren't going to be down with paying players. With superconferences, you can set up a merchandise/autograph pool and disburse a capped amount per player so that you can maintain some competitive balance. Maybe add in some tv money. Enough that the players are paid what they might get in a minor league, more or less. Call it a g a week to pick a manageable number. Do this for all sports that get televised and which sell swag. Other non-revenue sports can be supported by booster donations to a living expenses fund, if a conference wants to support, say the Olympic sports, or by sponsorship deals.

There's so much money swimming around out there, there's no reason it can't be funneled and organized in a simple, accountable way to pay players and even provide for a workman's comp type insurance for kids like Tyson Gentry or Adam Talliaferro who suffer debilitating injuries.

There are lots of models that can be created which both keep a Phil Knight or the asshole booster from Auburn from buying championships, while at the same time allowing the players to share in the profits that they're generating. What they almost all require, however, is the money earners (ie. the BCS teams) separating from the non-earners.

 

[BUCKYLE]

Probably what you do is slowly loosen the rules and see what effect it has. Part of what will change that is superconferences. Right now, the small schools who can't drum up a lot of autograph sales or who don't sell a lot of jerseys aren't going to be down with paying players. With superconferences, you can set up a merchandise/autograph pool and disburse a capped amount per player so that you can maintain some competitive balance. Maybe add in some tv money. Enough that the players are paid what they might get in a minor league, more or less. Call it a g a week to pick a manageable number. Do this for all sports that get televised and which sell swag. Other non-revenue sports can be supported by booster donations to a living expenses fund, if a conference wants to support, say the Olympic sports, or by sponsorship deals.

There's so much money swimming around out there, there's no reason it can't be funneled and organized in a simple, accountable way to pay players and even provide for a workman's comp type insurance for kids like Tyson Gentry or Adam Talliaferro who suffer debilitating injuries.

There are lots of models that can be created which both keep a Phil Knight or the asshole booster from Auburn from buying championships, while at the same time allowing the players to share in the profits that they're generating. What they almost all require, however, is the money earners (ie. the BCS teams) separating from the non-earners.

Thing is, it's not like Toledo's facilities are anywhere near any of the top tier schools as it is. Sure, the athletes at tOSU getting cash for sigs would widen that gap, but the gap has been there, and will continue to be there regardless.

Funny that you mention keeping Phil Knight from buying 'ships when it's pretty obvious to anyone but ESPN that has already happened. Well, a PAC 'ship anyway. Auburn bought the NC.

It's not like a hot-shot QB being recruited by TSUN, with their huge, historic stadium, world class weight room and years of producing NFL "talent" would choose a school like Tulsa. Wait...maybe that was a bad example.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Wall Street Journal:

The Case For Paying College Athletes

Somebody will win Saturday's football game between Ohio State and Miami, which has been jokingly dubbed "the IneligiBowl." But no matter the outcome, neither team can fairly consider itself a winner.

Both of these football powerhouses are under NCAA investigation for alleged rules violations in which athletes were given cash, gifts and services ranging from tattoos to wild parties on a private yacht. The NCAA, which is rightly determined to make sure its championships can't be bought, forbids athletes from taking anything from supporters beyond the benefits in their scholarships.

As the muck thickens, the narrative that has taken hold is that the lucrative end of college sports?particularly football?is a fetid swamp that needs to be drained and disinfected. But amid all the righteous indignation, there's a small but incongruous fact lurking just outside the picture: In most cases where college athletes take money, the sums are pretty small.

Miami quarterback Jacory Harris, to whom the NCAA gave a one-game suspension this season, was ordered to repay a tally of improper meals, entertainment and nightclub cover charges that totaled slightly more than $140. Several Ohio State players who allegedly traded memorabilia for tattoos were making transactions that could have been worth as little as $100. Even the roughly $5,600 in benefits that resulted in a suspension for North Carolina defensive end Robert Quinn last season was a pittance compared to the $1.8 million the school paid then-coach Butch Davis.

NCAA athletes are held to what is, essentially, the strictest code of amateurism in sports. It's not just that the rules prevent them from driving a booster's Ferrari to Las Vegas for the weekend. The rules can make them think twice before bumming a ride to the mall.

For years, there's been a drumbeat of talk about whether college players should be paid?or at least free to profit from their fame before they graduate. But this year, the chorus has grown considerably louder.

Continued....

Video interview with Ben Cohen, author of the above article