NCAA proposing new rules to allow schools to pay athletes directly

#127
#127
And in reading this closely, it has lawsuit written all over it.

- The school must allocate at least 30K per year for "half" of their countable athletes.
- At least 50% of those receiving the payment must be women.

Unless a school is willing to allocate funds for EVERY countable athlete, someone will be left out. That is like me and a fellow coworker doing the same thing and she gets paid, and I don't. Good luck with that!!

30K is the min not the max, so they can pay more.

Does that imply that the 50% paid gets the same amount? Or can it vary by person? If by person, who decides? And if by person, does the 50% rule still apply to the dollar allocation across males and females?

For the bare minimum if a school has the following number of countable athletes - this includes ALL the sports not just those that make revenue for the AD.

- 200 ==> 6M if all are paid, 3M if half are paid.
- 400 ==> 12M if all are paid, 6M if half are paid.
- 1000 ==> 30M if all are paid, 15M if half are paid.

The answer to if "all must get the same rate", will imply that some that are getting a lot of NIL money will not get that - it will be spread across the entire population of student athletes.

Schools will eventually reduce the number of sports they participate in removing the opportunity for some student athletes from (1) playing at the next level and (2) obtaining an education.
 
#129
#129
KnoxVegas said:
The minimum is $30k, which under title IX, is provided equally amongst women/men athletes.

It’s fairly established that QB’s are getting $1M+, so under this proposal, would the school then have to pay a female the same amount? True halfsies for every dollar withdrawn from the trust?

If so, this proposal won’t make it very far.
Click to expand...

Yes, the way it is written QB's are now in the pool of countable athletes and fairly certain the 50% will translate to dollars or it will be challenged.
 
#130
#130
This may be an attempt at an equal playing field before NIL blows up in court, which it will.

Edited to add: It is an attempt at an equal playing field. NIL is blowing up and it is a matter of time before an athlete challenges the inequality that NIL has brought about.
 
Last edited:
#131
#131
volfan102455 said:
This may be an attempt at an equal playing field before NIL blows up in court, which it will.

Edited to add: It is an attempt at an equal playing field. NIL is blowing up and it is a matter of time before an athlete challenges the inequality that NIL has brought about.
Click to expand...
Doesn't the NIL Cooperatives' independence from the Athletic Departments make this a moot point. Title IX is not affected. The Athletic Dept. is being equal.
 
#132
#132
SpookyAction said:
Doesn't the NIL Cooperatives' independence from the Athletic Departments make this a moot point. Title IX is not affected. The Athletic Dept. is being equal.
Click to expand...

This is clear that this is being proposed because of the inequalities that NIL is causing. If you think what is happening with NIL is resulting with all student athletes being treated equally - I don't what to tell you.

1701822783451.png
 
#133
#133
Just wondering, has anyone ever bought a product based on it being recommended by a college athlete ? If I'm in the coffee aisle, do I pick a brand of coffee because it was recommended by a tight end from Duke ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfan102455
#134
#134
Why does the NCAA still have ANYTHING TO DO with football? They are BEYOND irrelevant. Let them go control all of the OTHER sports that football PAYS FOR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfeeva
#135
#135
DuckInAPen said:
Does it? I'd wager that the amateur collegiate team would retain the loyalty of a greater portion of the fanbase than a spun-off minor league football team would. Perhaps, though, I'm too idealistic.
Click to expand...
Neyland didn't sell out often when the quality of Vol football was low. With the ESPNFLite league probably drawing the top 40% of recruits in America, "real UT" football vs "real SEC" opponents may easily drop to the level of MTSU vs UTC.

"At least it's real football" will only last so long when better quality football is nearby and on TV. Competing against ESPN for football ad revenue, UT might be back to Jeff-Pilot regional TV contracts with color commentary that makes Gary Danielson look good.
 
#136
#136
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Neyland didn't sell out often when the quality of Vol football was low. With the ESPNFLite league probably drawing the top 40% of recruits in America, "real UT" football vs "real SEC" opponents may easily drop to the level of MTSU vs UTC.

"At least it's real football" will only last so long when better quality football is nearby and on TV. Competing against ESPN for football ad revenue, UT might be back to Jeff-Pilot regional TV contracts with color commentary that makes Gary Danielson look good.
Click to expand...
You may be right, but, given the experience of other minor league sports, I'm doubtful.
 
#137
#137
So now we have to compete with an Ivy league school football team that has over $20 billion in endowments banked up!

aTm will be able to outbid just about anyone.
 
#138
#138
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Neyland didn't sell out often when the quality of Vol football was low. With the ESPNFLite league probably drawing the top 40% of recruits in America, "real UT" football vs "real SEC" opponents may easily drop to the level of MTSU vs UTC.

"At least it's real football" will only last so long when better quality football is nearby and on TV. Competing against ESPN for football ad revenue, UT might be back to Jeff-Pilot regional TV contracts with color commentary that makes Gary Danielson look good.
Click to expand...

Neither do the other teams when they aren't playing good.
 
#140
#140
Dadof2Vols said:
Oh Boy. Huge ramifications.

This will cause sports to be cut within programs.

Now University employees requiring full benefits

WAGE laws since they are no longer amateur Athletes

Oh boy, I could go on but being administered by school with no cap, for all those unhappy with NIL, this is full out pro sports

Wonder if ticket costs will go up, LOL
Click to expand...
Just wait until the women's basketweaving team makes a title IX case about not getting equal pay
 
#141
#141
DuckInAPen said:
You may be right, but, given the experience of other minor league sports, I'm doubtful.
Click to expand...

It is the BRAND that is associated with the University that sells along with the student and campus atmosphere. You take that away it is the equivalent of minor league sports that are very localized and not as well attended.

Competition would be directly with the NFL teams and folks that needed a football fix would just go there. Others would just find something else to do.

The top brand universities could either prohibit the use of their brand or charge a very high fee for the use of their brand.

Focus is now on the athlete who is actually trying to sell themselves, but it is the BRAND of the university that is the primary selling point. Case in point, I only care or know about Dobbs, Hooker and Nico because of their association with the University of Tennessee. I'm not rushing out to by a VT shirt with Hooker's number on it. Same would be true of the Manning brothers - I have a Peyton jersey but could care less about owning one associated with Eli.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen
#142
#142
volfeeva said:
Just wondering, has anyone ever bought a product based on it being recommended by a college athlete ? If I'm in the coffee aisle, do I pick a brand of coffee because it was recommended by a tight end from Duke ?
Click to expand...
I believe the "Cookie Monster" deal probably worked and I believe my wife may have given a couple of Hendon Hooker books as gifts.

But that's not really what NIL is about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfeeva and volfan102455
#143
#143
And to add, if the universities just said, I'm not doing this and decided to have a lower key program, they would still have a level of fans. Would the sport have the best of the best - no those players would be in the NFL minor league (... just like baseball ...) but if enough schools still played, the BRAND would still bring in fans and maybe even more so than the NFL minor league.

The NFL needs the College system to be successful. ESPN needs the college system to be successful. The student athletes need the college system to prepare themselves for any chance to play in the NFL. If there was just an NFL minor league, a lot of those playing football in college would no longer have a place to play. A very very very very small percentage of those that play are drafted each year.

This is not win situation for the universities, the NFL or the sports networks. Personally it has gotten so big and GREED has set in with everyone wanting a piece of the pie.
 
#144
#144
volfan102455 said:
It is the BRAND that is associated with the University that sells along with the student and campus atmosphere. You take that away it is the equivalent of minor league sports that are very localized and not as well attended.

Competition would be directly with the NFL teams and folks that needed a football fix would just go there. Others would just find something else to do.

The top brand universities could either prohibit the use of their brand or charge a very high fee for the use of their brand.

Focus is now on the athlete who is actually trying to sell themselves, but it is the BRAND of the university that is the primary selling point. Case in point, I only care or know about Dobbs, Hooker and Nico because of their association with the University of Tennessee. I'm not rushing out to by a VT shirt with Hooker's number on it. Same would be true of the Manning brothers - I have a Peyton jersey but could care less about owning one associated with Eli.
Click to expand...
Actually, if a ESPNFLite league develops it would compete directly with college for athletes and ad revenue.

The leagues would go after the kids too young to make the NFL but the ESPNFLite league could also include older guys who can't quite make the NFL or did and then got cut. College can't do that.

You could see guys who played "real college" ball for UT move to ESPNFLite if they don't make the NFL.

The difference in media is what builds the league. Colleges will have to find someone to televise competing games, likely at competing times on Saturday, against ESPN.

It's quality. It's just a fact we saw in the B1G and ACC championship games: bad football is not fun to watch unless "real college" can match or come close to pro quality.

There's a reason why college is on Saturday and the NFL is on Sunday. Head-to-head the NFL would beat the brakes off college ball on TV.
 
#145
#145
SpookyAction said:
I can't say I am fully in favor of student athletes becoming professionals, but the legal argument against paying them a wage or salary is not strong.

The rule against paying them is an NCAA rule from 1906. It is not legally binding. It is an agreement between universities and conferences to have common standards. This makes the NCAA a "joint venture", competing under a common set of rules.

The NCAA's legal arguments amount to that it should effectively be exempted from antitrust rules that prevent businesses from colluding with their competitors to set workers’ compensation. Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh addressed this directly in their 2021 opinions.

The Supreme Court did not address that matter, because it was not part to the name and likeness lawsuit before it in 2021. That case struck down the NCAA restrictions on name and likeness compensation only. Judge Gorsuch's decision stated the NCAA had to follow the same anti-trust rules as everyone else. It alluded that the anti-trust exemptions sports leagues in the US enjoy does not extend to the NCAA's attempt to limit player compensation.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a separate concurring opinion where he argues that “the NCAA’s remaining compensation rules also raise serious questions under the antitrust laws."
“The NCAA’s business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America.” Among other things, the NCAA “controls the market for college athletes;” it “concedes that its compensation rules set the price of student athlete labor at a below-market rate”; and it “recognizes that student athletes currently have no meaningful ability to negotiate with the NCAA over the compensation rules.”

That is a shot across the bow of the NCAA , and a signal to student-athletes that they should consider filing a new lawsuit challenging the NCAA’s remaining restrictions on compensation.

And that is how we are here.
Click to expand...

The legal argument for not paying them was doing just fine for about 100 years
 
#146
#146
The Original Fade said:
The legal argument for not paying them was doing just fine for about 100 years
Click to expand...
Actually, as soon as it was challenged in 90s first, it began to erode. I believe some basketball player sued because the NCAA let his name be used in a video game and they lost.

It's never been legal in America to keep someone from earning money from their NIL. The players just didn't sue until recently because the amount of money being made by schools via these athletes is ridiculous now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpookyAction
#147
#147
The Original Fade said:
The legal argument for not paying them was doing just fine for about 100 years
Click to expand...
Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh teed this up for the players in the NIL decision.
NCAA is going to lose on compensation vs amateurism.
The writing is on the wall.

It will simply be up to the NCAA and the big money programs, to figure out how they want to structure the system for wages/salary while athletes keep their amateur status.
The NCAA has 100% incentive to figure this out so it can continue to exist at the will of the Top 50 programs.
Otherwise it will be defanged and only overseeing the have-nots of the college athletics world.
 
#148
#148
volfan102455 said:
This is clear that this is being proposed because of the inequalities that NIL is causing. If you think what is happening with NIL is resulting with all student athletes being treated equally - I don't what to tell you.

View attachment 600180
Click to expand...
Who said NIL treats athletes equally?
NIL folding into each school's Athletic Department is a nonstarter.
 
#150
#150
SpookyAction said:
Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh teed this up for the players in the NIL decision.
NCAA is going to lose on compensation vs amateurism.
The writing is on the wall.

It will simply be up to the NCAA and the big money programs, to figure out how they want to structure the system for wages/salary while athletes keep their amateur status.
The NCAA has 100% incentive to figure this out so it can continue to exist at the will of the Top 50 programs.
Otherwise it will be defanged and only overseeing the have-nots of the college athletics world.
Click to expand...
I really don't see "wages/salary" and "amateur status" being easily compatible for obvious reasons.

I'm all for college ball surviving but I can only see it working with the big money no longer driving the bus.

I think "old school college ball" will only be the "have nots" where there's less money involved and more emphasis on the old student-athlete model.

With wages in the equation, I just can't imagine being able to require a salaried employee to attend school full-time AND work for you full-time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpookyAction
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top