Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="HtownOrange, post: 3127650, member: 622"] Even in your scenario, the law student may NOT get a cut, nor may a law clerk awaiting Bar results so he or she can start actually being a lawyer. Until they have the actual law license, they may not share in the revenue other than a stated hourly rate or salary. Bonuses may be paid as a general benefit but may not be tied to any particular cases (at least here in Texas). Thus, you are mandating that law students (who are also limited in the amount of time they may work jobs while attending full time as mandated by the Bar Association) be treated worse that a kid that merely has a physical gift to play sports. The parallel to your scenario is that the student athlete is getting a fixed income (room, board, food, special diet, work out facilities, gear, stipend, all tax free making the whole deal worth approximately $100K/year) and must wait until they turn pro/leave school. Also, concvenient points most on here are missing include: 1) The kids are signing a contract, they are not forced into sports by the schools 2) The kids can choose which school to attend 3) the kids can reject a school offer (in fact, most offers are rejected because most kids get multiple offers) 4) The kids' likeness is likely worth nothing without being associated with a team 5) Schools will sell jerseys, they can leave the name of the player off the jersey, no royalty paid to student 6) Schools can quit offering scholarships and these kids will not have this option as a means of showcasing their talents for the pros 7) Schools can drop the sports altogether (same issue as in 6) 8) Kids have other options besides college (this is limited in football, but it is still there) 9) Kids are prohibited from going pro out of HS, this has nothing to do with the NCAA, both the NBA and NFL set the age limits for their benefit - the reality is that most kids are not physically ready for either sport out of HS. There are exceptions, but too few for the NBA and NFL to make it worth their while. MLB does not care, they have the minor league system in place. 10) Schools do NOT make as much money as everyone thinks. Most schools lose money on their Athletic Departments. SU is blessed because they manage their resources well (in spite of some of our complaints, mine as well as others), but they are one of about 20 that runs in the black. 11) The talent pool for college level sports is far larger than the talent pool for the pro leagues. Elite talent in every industry gets paid more than general talent. The market already addresses this issue. 12) The tax issues have failed to be addressed. As a player's popularity becomes greater as he/she is associated with a certain school, the scholarship will likely be counted as income as it contributes to the earning power of the desired "likeness" deals. Without the school, the player's likeness is worthless. The IRS will take their share one way or the other and if they sniff a new argument to bring in new revenues, they will follow it. 13) The NCAA is a coalition of the schools to create an "even" playing field. Is it completely fair based on talent? No, no body claimed it was. However, the schools agreed to the set of rules as a means of ensuring some level of fairness and consistency, as corrupt as they are, the corruption is still far less than before the NCAA was in place. That said, the NCAA will do what the member schools direct it to do. 14) Title IX is real. It may not be ignored. Too many posters on hear are attempting to scheme around it (make players employees, increased stipends for hoops/football, etc., etc., etc.) but ignore the intent of the Feds in making Title IX. 15) It is extremely unlikely that any federal legislation that would in any manner appear that some athletes in revenue generating sports could get more benefits (stipend, pay, etc.) than other athletes will never see the light of day. 16) As noted elsewhere, schools are non-profits and reinvest in future generations of training students. They are multi-billion dollar entities and as non-profits, they reinvest their "profits". It costs a fortune to conduct research, without the research conducted at schools by students, we would not enjoy many of the advances we enjoy to date as compared to 50, 100, 150, 200 years ago. 17) Considering the last point, the measly $20MM profit the few schools make off of their athletics departments really is minimal. The ADs are designed to build comraderie of students, "advertise" the school, and have some fun. The investment is not as profitable as most imply. 18) Many posters liken the student to the coach while ignoring the coaching pool is much more specialized, has a lesser talent pool, and suffers all the pressure (they can be fired for failure, a school cannot withdraw a scholarship for poor play - Yes, athletic scholarships are not guaranteed for four years, they should be! - Thankfully, schools like SU generally only withdraw scholarships for academic or behavioral issues. 19) The argument that players do not get unemployment benefits and/or Workman's Compensation is not an issue. Students are NOT employees. Student athletes get full medical care, advanced care, in reality. While I agree with you in principal (athletes should be able to make some money off their likenesses, but I feel no sorrow for the players as they are getting the equivalent of $100K/year which is more than most individuals will ever earn) individual states have no legal basis to invalidate the contract that the schools across the nation have made with each other nor to invalidate the contracts of the conferences and schools and everything else. The unintended consequences are not worth the risk when the parties were and are looking into the matter. I would rather the parties involved work this out rather than Congress, or California, or all 50 states. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?