NCAA goes to court

[Toga]

Discuss

NCAA asks US appeals court to block pay for student-athletes

The NCAA is asking a federal appeals court to reject a legal effort to make colleges pay Division I athletes an hourly wage.

apnews.com

 

[orangefog]

Good lord, what a freaking mess.

 

[Bulldog04]

They are the worst organization in America

 

[MikeSU02]

I wonder if all the NCAA’s lawyers got houses near each other in Hamptons. What a gig.

 

[Fly Rodder]

They are the worst organization in America

There are worse, but outside of FIFA, I don't know if there is a more dysfunctional sports organization in the world. Maybe Olympics. The NCAA is at times inept, illegal, overbearing, capricious, and downright villainous, and sometimes all things at once.

Remember, no cream cheese on bagels and no pasta at graduation banquets.

Too much pasta landed three University of Oklahoma athletes on the wrong side of the NCAA rule book.

The unusual case, first reported Wednesday by the Oklahoman, came after the trio attended a graduation banquet in 2013. To restore their eligibility, the athletes each had to donate $3.83 to charity to cover the cost of the pasta. The school reported the situation to the NCAA.

Meanwhile ...

The NCAA paid its president nearly $3 million and separately plunked down some $500,000 in lobbying costs as part of the almost $68 million the organization spent on legal fees, public tax records revealed on Monday.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

While the NCAA sucks, I am firmly in the camp that schools directly paying employee wages to student-athletes would be devastating to higher education in general.

 

[Fly Rodder]

While the NCAA sucks, I am firmly in the camp that schools directly paying employee wages to student-athletes would be devastating to higher education in general.

Mostly because they've grown fat, happy and dependent on any sports related revenue going directly into their general fund, administrators, coaches, and facilities while increasingly restrictive on their athletes. This isn't 1935 where some of the rowers on the UW team had to work on the Grand Coulee dam to make extra money before going to the Olympics.

 

[LoveShack]

There are worse, but outside of FIFA, I don't know if there is a more dysfunctional sports organization in the world. Maybe Olympics. The NCAA is at times inept, illegal, overbearing, capricious, and downright villainous, and sometimes all things at once.

I read this as if it was being said by Jackie Chiles

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Mostly because they've grown fat, happy and dependent on any sports related revenue going directly into their general fund, administrators, coaches, and facilities while increasingly restrictive on their athletes. This isn't 1935 where some of the rowers on the UW team had to work on the Grand Coulee dam to make extra money before going to the Olympics.

I agree that's a part of it, but there are other big picture issues around the cost of higher education and how higher education is funded that are also huge factors, and that's why I think paying student athletes directly is so destructive.

 

[AlaskaSU]

Judges decisions are based on the law regardless of implications. The NCAA's argument seems to be that payments would destroy amateurism. Judges are not concerned with policy implications. Policies are made by legislatures. The NCAA might lose. Expect chaos.

The big picture is that amateur college basketball and football have transitioned to big business. These teams are business enterprises conducted by public and private schools.

What percentage of these athletes graduate? How does their rate compare to the average graduation rate? If the two rates greatly diverge it cannot be argued that their primary purpose is education.

 

[upperdeck]

Judges decisions are based on the law regardless of implications. The NCAA's argument seems to be that payments would destroy amateurism. Judges are not concerned with policy implications. Policies are made by legislatures. The NCAA might lose. Expect chaos.

The big picture is that amateur college basketball and football have transitioned to big business. These teams are business enterprises conducted by public and private schools.

What percentage of these athletes graduate? How does their rate compare to the average graduation rate? If the two rates greatly diverge it cannot be argued that their primary purpose is education.

i would say the grad rate is much higher for athletes than the general pop

 

[Brooky03]

I think I speak for all humans when I say it would be nice for the NCAA to lose this case quickly and in an embarrassing way.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Judges decisions are based on the law regardless of implications. The NCAA's argument seems to be that payments would destroy amateurism. Judges are not concerned with policy implications. Policies are made by legislatures. The NCAA might lose. Expect chaos.

The big picture is that amateur college basketball and football have transitioned to big business. These teams are business enterprises conducted by public and private schools.

What percentage of these athletes graduate? How does their rate compare to the average graduation rate? If the two rates greatly diverge it cannot be argued that their primary purpose is education.

If they win, I think it will signal the end of scholarships as they exist. Needs based will be next up.

 

[Hoo's That]

i would say the grad rate is much higher for non-revenue sport athletes than the general pop

FIFY. Non-rev athletes have admissions packages much closer to the gen pop averages than revenue sport athletes have.

 

[Cusefan95]

FIFY. Non-rev athletes have admissions packages much closer to the gen pop averages than revenue sport athletes have.

There's huge measurement issues with this conclusion - I haven't seen any data I'd consider reliable. Are you using the Federal Graduation Rate? The Graduation Success Rate which the NCAA prefers? Some other metric?

Plus, just the nature of being a scholarship student athlete means there are differences from the general student body that are significant. One of the factors which impacts the top football programs is guys leaving early for the NFL draft, which has a negative impact on Federal Graduation Rate. Should we treat it that way when assessing graduation rates? Same as if I transfer to get more playing time - the college I just left gets negatively impacted on Federal Graduation Rate. I think most people feel the players having more control and being able to transfer easier than in the past is a good thing - if that's the case then using FGR as the metric of success is deeply flawed and counterproductive.

I'm not sure a valid metric even exists (and I'm not sure its even possible to create one) - the ones that do exist have significant biases built in, so they tend to get cited if they support whatever argument is being made and ignored otherwise. I'd settle for people just being transparent about what standards they used and not just citing a raw percentage - but also realize few people are statistically savvy enough to handle that nuance and it would minimize the rhetorical value of using the methodology that supports your bias.

TL; DR version - I've learned that almost everything we think we know is actually b***sh**.

 

[RandygoCuse]

I'm all for athletes being able to cash in on NIL.

It gets a little trickier when considering if they should get paid directly to the school. Does tuition play into payment? Do all athletes get paid to comply with Title 9? Will it cause raises in already high tuition? Or will it lead to athletic programs being cut. I can't stand the NCAA, but I think there are arguments to be made on both sides of this issue.

 

[Hoo's That]

There's huge measurement issues with this conclusion - I haven't seen any data I'd consider reliable. Are you using the Federal Graduation Rate? The Graduation Success Rate which the NCAA prefers? Some other metric?

Plus, just the nature of being a scholarship student athlete means there are differences from the general student body that are significant. One of the factors which impacts the top football programs is guys leaving early for the NFL draft, which has a negative impact on Federal Graduation Rate. Should we treat it that way when assessing graduation rates? Same as if I transfer to get more playing time - the college I just left gets negatively impacted on Federal Graduation Rate. I think most people feel the players having more control and being able to transfer easier than in the past is a good thing - if that's the case then using FGR as the metric of success is deeply flawed and counterproductive.

I'm not sure a valid metric even exists (and I'm not sure its even possible to create one) - the ones that do exist have significant biases built in, so they tend to get cited if they support whatever argument is being made and ignored otherwise. I'd settle for people just being transparent about what standards they used and not just citing a raw percentage - but also realize few people are statistically savvy enough to handle that nuance and it would minimize the rhetorical value of using the methodology that supports your bias.

TL; DR version - I've learned that almost everything we think we know is actually b***sh**.

All I know is that UVa has a 94.3% Federal graduation rate within 5 years. I can assure you that 94.3% of our football players are not graduating in that time period. The official website usually will have graduation pictures that usually show much less than the 20-something that entered. Players leave for a variety of reasons and IDK if they finish at their new school (assuming they go on to another school and don't just drop out completely).