#notncaaproperty

[UpstateSM]

but your assumption is that the players aren't already getting additional monies, room, board, health insurance, pell grants, etc. With school at 75k per clip the "pocket money" is beginning to round into a legit professional salary for someone that is 18 with no skill other than basketball or football.

These things cost money. I think they are getting compensated it's just not the free market that is doing it. I suspect if this goes full compensation route, there will be a rot of the benefits the lesser athletes receive over time. The house of cards to me then falls apart and schools won't find it appealing to run as many teams, etc and may stop underwriting the band, etc.

The schools aren't going to compensate the players. NIL is outside entities/people paying players for marketing.

You're making an issue where it doesn't exist for some reason. There has not been any evidence that schools or the NCAA are going to pay players. And even if they did everyone would have to be compensated equally as the law currently stands.

I'm not even sure what your "pocket money" statement means.

 

[Alsacs]

These are college kids, Its hard for them to grasp the free market concept. If I'm Kadary and my teammate is getting a lot more money for commercials than I am, I'm going to be bothered by it.

By this logic why isn’t Kadary bothered he doesn’t get more benefits than JBA or any scholarship player on the deep bench.
He contributes more to the team now.
Why is he okay being equals now?

 

[UpstateSM]

Wait until Joe realizes that chucking up shots from 25' are worth more money than mundane things like assists and steals.

Oh c'mon. Getting paid a grand (maybe) to post something on Instagram isn't going to outweigh winning games and, more importantly, playing to a level that gets you paid to play after college. And if he does he will sit on the bench with the walk-ons.

Its fear mongering

 

[Briancuse]

By this logic why isn’t Kadary bothered he doesn’t get more benefits than JBA or any scholarship player on the deep bench.
He contributes more to the team now.
Why is he okay being equals now?

How do you know how many benefits he is getting? Or not getting?

 

[Alsacs]

Wait until Joe realizes that chucking up shots from 25' are worth more money than mundane things like assists and steals.

Yeah he already chucked that 25’ 3 point shot at Rutgers this year and started the run we lost that game off.
It would be nothing new.
You also don’t understand being a social influencer which is fine.

 

[Alsacs]

How do you know how many benefits he is getting? Or not getting?

Every player gets the same benefits now.
My god. What are you saying?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Not sure if I'm proud or disappointed that you haven't said that Taco Time is now presented by JG3

Oh he already made the commercial.

 

[elimunelson]

The schools aren't going to compensate the players. NIL is outside entities/people paying players for marketing.

You're making an issue where it doesn't exist for some reason. There has not been any evidence that schools or the NCAA are going to pay players. And even if they did everyone would have to be compensated equally as the law currently stands.

I'm not even sure what your "pocket money" statement means.

you're crazy if you don't think the NIL issue ultimately becomes the opening to colleges compensating with less oversight. They lose their amateur status w the NIL would be my guess.

The pocket money i'm saying is when college cost a fraction of what it does now. If schools are fronting 75k a year for a kid to attend Syracuse that's not 5k to go to Umass in 1992.

The idea of amateur athletics will end with the NIl decision. I don't support it. I support kids getting bigger stipends but this is a pandora's box of problems coming and I really don't want to see the end of college athletics even if it's become a frankenstein ish operation

 

[Briancuse]

Every player gets the same benefits now.
My god. What are you saying?

Thats what I am saying, if everyone gets the same why would he be bothered?

 

[Alsacs]

Thats what I am saying, if everyone gets the same why would he be bothered?

Because you are saying he would be bothered with somebody more marketable getting more.
Why isn’t he bothered someone who contributes less now getting the same as him currently.

 

[Briancuse]

Because you are saying he would be bothered with somebody more marketable getting more.
Why isn’t he bothered someone who contributes less now getting the same as him currently.

I thought you meant if someone got more than him, if every player gets the same whether they are Ayo Dissouma sp or the 15th guy on the roster, there is no reason to be bothered. Commercial money would be a whole different ballgame.

 

[UpstateSM]

you're crazy if you don't think the NIL issue ultimately becomes the opening to colleges compensating with less oversight. They lose their amateur status w the NIL would be my guess.

The pocket money i'm saying is when college cost a fraction of what it does now. If schools are fronting 75k a year for a kid to attend Syracuse that's not 5k to go to Umass in 1992.

The idea of amateur athletics will end with the NIl decision. I don't support it. I support kids getting bigger stipends but this is a pandora's box of problems coming and I really don't want to see the end of college athletics even if it's become a frankenstein ish operation

Well you're wrong because you only lose amateur status if you're paid to play a sport. Getting paid for a marketing purpose isn't getting paid to play the sport. Look up the Olympic Model.

I can't even remotely comprehend how you support bigger stipends, when that money DOES come from the schools, but not support NIL when that money comes from outside sources. Totally counter-intuitive to your worry of kids losing their amateur status (which is a fallacy anyways).

 

[Alsacs]

I thought you meant if someone got more than him, if every player gets the same whether they are Ayo Dissouma sp or the 15th guy on the roster, there is no reason to be bothered. Commercial money would be a whole different ballgame.

Every player gets the same baseline.

If players can get even more on their own I don’t give a chit about jealousy.

It’s how things work. Social influencers could be the trickshot kicker from UCF.
He isn’t a better football player than all the rest of his roster but he has a niche he can make money off. If his teammates are upset at that then they can do what he does and get make money.

 

[Briancuse]

Every player gets the same baseline.

If players can get even more on their own I don’t give a chit about jealousy.

It’s how things work. Social influencers could be the trickshot kicker from UCF.
He isn’t a better football player than all the rest of his roster but he has a niche he can make money off. If his teammates are upset at that then they can do what he does and get make money.

Its how things work, but you don't think its going to cause extreme tension? Buddy is going to get all the ads because he is the good looking kid with blonde hair with a famous dad.

 

[TheCusian]

you're crazy if you don't think the NIL issue ultimately becomes the opening to colleges compensating with less oversight. They lose their amateur status w the NIL would be my guess.

The pocket money i'm saying is when college cost a fraction of what it does now. If schools are fronting 75k a year for a kid to attend Syracuse that's not 5k to go to Umass in 1992.

The idea of amateur athletics will end with the NIl decision. I don't support it. I support kids getting bigger stipends but this is a pandora's box of problems coming and I really don't want to see the end of college athletics even if it's become a frankenstein ish operation

I think what is clear is that it's already over. The money flow is widespread. The answer, much like legalizing drugs - is making it above ground and regulated. The problem, is that the NCAA is largely unable to manage the regulation. But taking it above ground does provide more of a chance to do it the right way.

You're right that it might blow up the whole thing. But if it does, it will be on the NCAA, conferences, and stakeholders - not the players.

 

[Scooch]

but your assumption is that the players aren't already getting additional monies, room, board, health insurance, pell grants, etc. With school at 75k per clip the "pocket money" is beginning to round into a legit professional salary for someone that is 18 with no skill other than basketball or football.

These things cost money. I think they are getting compensated it's just not the free market that is doing it. I suspect if this goes full compensation route, there will be a rot of the benefits the lesser athletes receive over time. The house of cards to me then falls apart and schools won't find it appealing to run as many teams, etc and may stop underwriting the band, etc.

That’s not my assumption at all. The same non-athlete students I mentioned may be getting scholarships, work study, etc. That still doesn’t preclude them for generating revenue on their own.

Look, I love college sports. It’s awesome. But it also makes no sense whatsoever. That American universities became the defacto minor leagues of football and basketball is something not replicated anywhere else in the world. That these sports generate billions of dollars in revenue can’t be explained logically as a necessary part of the educational mission of a university.

We’re entering a three week period where hundreds of millions of dollars in profit is going to be generated. If someone thinks that a player getting a non-guaranteed scholarship and meal money is adequate compensation that’s fine. Many argue that. Personally I think preventing Buddy from making a few bucks by getting a share of #35 jersey sales is un-American, but your mileage may vary.

 

[Arangeman]

I see it as a recruiting tool. Come to OSU, standard 75k for every player each year for autograph session. Bama ups it to 100k, etc. If this opens up, schools would be foolish not to use it to lure recruits.

Boosters can be philanthropic but are basically rich people spending money to win ballgames. The ROI is for the program.

Players should be paid. But I don’t know how you regulate it to not destroy competitive balance even further.

 

[Bayside44]

Did you know who Devonta Smith was before the season started last year?
Did you know anything about him?
How much money would he get for endorsements?

I knew he was one of 4 stud Alabama WRs I wouldn’t have been able to pick him out of a lineup if you offered me money.

Endorsements aren’t going to be just given out like candy. The booster wants to win but they aren’t going to give newbies endorsements before the current players. The endorsements won’t even be that much except for the players that could help the company sell a product.

College basketball isn’t going to get players making a lot of money for endorsements the NBA studs are the ones with brand appeal.

It would all be local stuff for moderate money.

The amount of money being flung out isn’t going to be as much as people think. Boosters are already dropping bags. It’s not going to be bad.

They won't give endorsements but there will be a bunch of Artie Moreno's buying up 5 star talent to attend ole state U. And when the usual % of players flop the booster moves on and the coaches will deal with it. Which sounds fun.

I think the endorsement stuff is overplayed. I don't think there are 5 college basketball players this season that can sell anything beyond their fan base. And who cares what a 19 year old endorses anyway.

To Bees post earlier there are thing the kids get, add in the Nike money (or whatever endorser) to the pile.

Edit - and you guys are right that for some the money is to be made on owning the blue checkmark.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I see it as a recruiting tool. Come to OSU, standard 75k for every player each year for autograph session. Bama ups it to 100k, etc. If this opens up, schools would be foolish not to use it to lure recruits.

Boosters can be philanthropic but are basically rich people spending money to win ballgames. The ROI is for the program.

Players should be paid. But I don’t know how you regulate it to not destroy competitive balance even further.

The answer is, you don't.

 

[Chip]

The answer is, you don't.

I wish they could put the money in a trust and give it to them when they leave campus (no matter how they leave campus, what they earned is what they earned).

I think there should be some worry about instant 6 or 7 figure bank accounts being handed to 18 year old college students/athletes, many of whom grew up with little to no means. Yeah, I know, they're legal adults (who can't legally drink alcohol). But it seems like so often around here when one screws up, we get the line "they're just kids being kids".

At the end of the day, I don't really care though. My life will go on unaffected by this either way.

 

[DeGrozz]

I wish they could put the money in a trust and give it to them when they leave campus (no matter how they leave campus, what they earned is what they earned).

I think there should be some worry about instant 6 or 7 figure bank accounts being handed to 18 year old college students/athletes, many of whom grew up with little to no means. Yeah, I know, they're legal adults (who can't legally drink alcohol). But it seems like so often around here when one screws up, we get the line "they're just kids being kids".

At the end of the day, I don't really care though. My life will go on unaffected by this either way.

I actually think the biggest worry will be investment funds being set-up to prey on impoverished 18-year olds.

Look at Fernando Tatis (who I don't even think was poor -- his dad was a big league ball player). He likely got less than a million bucks or so when he was 18 years-old, now it is expected that he owes ~8% (or a range of 1%-12%, depending on what you read) of his third of a BILLION dollar contract to a bunch of rich dudes. (George W Bush's brother, an ex-Goldman Partner, and Paul DePodesta)

It's impossible to find a big money industry in America that has access to youths that don't abuse the living hell out of it.

If the NCAA steps up and does the right thing here, I hope it is done in a highly regulated manner and deals like that are completely banned still.

 

[texascpa]

If they want to get paid, they're going to get taxed on everything - strength & conditioning, meals, gear, food, access to facilities, access to private coaching, all of that is not free and not cheap.

These kids have no idea how good they have it. Yes, they should be able to profit on their name, image and likeness. And yes, that's a long time coming.

But the compensation they have been provided - free education, housing, top-end food, weight room access, medical bills for surgeries, athletic training, free gear, on top of marketing their name/brand on national television numerous times. Those things add up to a lot of money.

Except that's not how tax laws work. "Incidentals" or items in which value cannot be apportioned (relatively easy) are not taxable. That's why when your company buys pizza for lunch, you don't get taxed on it. I would go one step further and say that the value of the scholarship encompasses those costs, but it's neither here nor there, none of those costs (other than maybe the gear) is taxable on it's own.

 

[690West]

Doug has thoughts

 

[djcon57]

The idea that some of “you don’t want this to ruin college sports” while 2 guys just paid a 10 million dollar buy out to their bb coach is lol funny.

Pssst...I want to let you in on a secret. Alabama being in the championship game every year in football doesn’t happen in a fair system. Nothing about the current system is fair. Money is already in play. It just isn’t going to the players in the open...yet

 

[texascpa]

That is bs too

Why? They provide the resources, the facilities, the funding to do his work. Should they not own it?

Would you argue a scientist for Johnson & Johnson owns any of his discoveries?