Pac-12 player group threatens to opt out, makes list of demands on injustice, safety

[sccshortstop]

Looks like Washington State sent the first shot back at their players in the revolt!! This is going to cause them to be on scholarship this year but the future looks more bleak! Killing the golden goose that laid their golden eggs! JMHO as always and each can have their own as well!

 

[MAUSERWERKE]

It's definitely headed for a divorce. Whatever its final form is (big football/basketball schools leaving the NCAA to create a superleague that could pay players, etc.) is up for debate, but the current dynamic is not sustainable because it ultimately is an antiquated system still functioning in the modern era. When college sports were first devised, no one could have imagined they'd become the moneymaker they've become.

However, even if a superleague was created where the football and basketball teams were just kind of part of the school, the schools still run into the problem of how to finance the non-revenue producing sports. The football and basketball revenue wouldn't be available in a superleague scenario either. So what do they do - raise tuition prices to even more astronomical levels? I don't think that's workable either.

Any school that accepts federal money (and they all do) has to abide by Title IX. So unless Title IX is repealed or modified, I don't see how schools could proceed given the big financial disparities between football/men's basketball and non revenue sports (and almost all womens' sports are non revenue). Will be interesting to watch how this plays out.

 

[MAUSERWERKE]

Employees of course should be allowed to approach an employer and demand a certain share of revenue (effectively the right to organize). Of course, the owner(s) can tell employees to take a hike as well.

I don't have a problem with the players demanding anything - they have the right to do so - but I don't think they really understand at all the implications of what they are demanding. They think this is a simple issue (i.e., my school is cheating me out of money and could just pay me) when in fact it is not.

Actually, the players don't have the "legal" right to demand anything. Not the way an employee does. The NCAA created the definition of a "student-athlete" out of whole cloth specifically to avoid the application of labor laws to college athletes. I think that is a part of the inherent contradictions of the current system. The players are treated very much like employees of an entertainment business. But they don't have any legal rights as employees would.

 

[sjt18]

Some seem to determined to destroy anything that is "good" in our society.

I didn't get a "free" education and was a very good student. I got a few scholarships but nowhere near what it cost even then. One of my scholarships came with an 8 year military commitment. My sons didn't get a free education. They joined the Air Guard and put their college careers on hold for a year to complete training to pay for college.

Millions of students of all races (many who are more qualified to attend a particular school than those complaining athletes) will graduate college owing $100K or more with FAR less support and job prospects than an athlete who simply takes advantage of the educational opportunity. The scholarship is worth WELL over $100K and much more for some schools.

This is ridiculous. If these players don't want the scholarship then give it to one of the many thousands of young men who can only dream of playing college football at that level.

 

[05_never_again]

Actually, the players don't have the "legal" right to demand anything. Not the way an employee does. The NCAA created the definition of a "student-athlete" out of whole cloth specifically to avoid the application of labor laws to college athletes. I think that is a part of the inherent contradictions of the current system. The players are treated very much like employees of an entertainment business. But they don't have any legal rights as employees would.

You don't have to be an employee to ask something from an authority/governing body. That's all I meant. I know that the players aren't designated as employees and so they don't have the legal right to be paid minimum wage or something like that. All I meant was they have the right to ask their school, or the NCAA, to pay them but it doesn't mean the NCAA actually has to do so.

 

[Vol8188]

From here https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/pac-12-players-covid-19-statement-football-season

"Preserve All Existing Sports by Eliminating Excessive Expenditures
Larry Scott, administrators, and coaches to voluntarily and drastically reduce excessive pay."

End lavish facility expenditures and use some endowment funds to preserve all sports.*
*As an example, Stanford University should reinstate all sports discontinued by tapping into their $27.7 billion endowment.

"In partnership with the Pac-12, 2% of conference revenue would be directed by players to support financial aid for low-income Black students, community initiatives, and development programs for college athletes on each campus."

"Medical insurance selected by players for sports-related medical conditions, including COVID- 19 illness, to cover six years after college athletics eligibility ends."

"Distribute 50% of each sport’s total conference revenue evenly among athletes in their respective sports....Six-year athletic scholarships to foster undergraduate and graduate degree completion."

Seems like another neomarxist movement like BLM

 

[05_never_again]

Seems like another neomarxist movement like BLM

No, because unlike Marxists these players are actually working and doing something productive to generate the revenue they want a share of.

 

[Vol8188]

No, because unlike Marxists these players are actually working and doing something productive to generate the revenue they want a share of.

Their demands go well beyond a share. For one they believe they should receive half the revenue. Not half the profit. Half the revenue.

They also want coaches to receive smaller salaries and less investment into programs in general. It’s all Marxist garbage.

I don’t oppose players making money. But that’s not what this is about

 

[Wireless1]

Their demands go well beyond a share. For one they believe they should receive half the revenue. Not half the profit. Half the revenue.

They also want coaches to receive smaller salaries and less investment into programs in general. It’s all Marxist garbage.

I don’t oppose players making money. But that’s not what this is about

They deserve what they'll get. Cutting coaches salaries will result in poorer coaching which will result in poorer performance thus less chance at the NFL for no big payday....yep Marxist garbage.

 

[butchna]

It's definitely headed for a divorce. Whatever its final form is (big football/basketball schools leaving the NCAA to create a superleague that could pay players, etc.) is up for debate, but the current dynamic is not sustainable because it ultimately is an antiquated system still functioning in the modern era. When college sports were first devised, no one could have imagined they'd become the moneymaker they've become.

However, even if a superleague was created where the football and basketball teams were just kind of part of the school, the schools still run into the problem of how to finance the non-revenue producing sports. The football and basketball revenue wouldn't be available in a superleague scenario either. So what do they do - raise tuition prices to even more astronomical levels? I don't think that's workable either.

The Pac-12 players are advocating universities dip into their endowments to support other sports. Which I think may be illegal.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Actually, the players don't have the "legal" right to demand anything. Not the way an employee does. The NCAA created the definition of a "student-athlete" out of whole cloth specifically to avoid the application of labor laws to college athletes. I think that is a part of the inherent contradictions of the current system. The players are treated very much like employees of an entertainment business. But they don't have any legal rights as employees would.

Pretty much what I have been saying in this forum for 5+ years. The schools setup a big racket (basically football and basketball) and now its coming home to roost.

We are witnessing the end of the big money college sports although it will take a little more time to play out.

 

[MAUSERWERKE]

You don't have to be an employee to ask something from an authority/governing body. That's all I meant. I know that the players aren't designated as employees and so they don't have the legal right to be paid minimum wage or something like that. All I meant was they have the right to ask their school, or the NCAA, to pay them but it doesn't mean the NCAA actually has to do so.

I understand. I only meant to clarify. The absence of legal protections is a big issue, I think. As things stand right now, if a player opted to sit out this year due to covid, I think the university could pull his scholarship. Now, no school is likely to do that, because the optics are so bad. But legally, they could IMHO.

 

[05_never_again]

The Pac-12 players are advocating universities dip into their endowments to support other sports. Which I think may be illegal.

It would be illegal, and is a stupid demand.

 

[MAUSERWERKE]

They deserve what they'll get. Cutting coaches salaries will result in poorer coaching which will result in poorer performance thus less chance at the NFL for no big payday....yep Marxist garbage.

It would not shock me to learn that these players don't know the difference between profit and revenue. Which is a commentary on the quality of education they have been getting.

 

[MAUSERWERKE]

Finebaum is opening with this Pac12 thing today.

 

[Dumbledorange]

They deserve what they'll get. Cutting coaches salaries will result in poorer coaching which will result in poorer performance thus less chance at the NFL for no big payday....yep Marxist garbage.

Yes, our coaches will just quit caring, open up their left-sided brains for Mr. Stupid to appear and then curl up and cry. They might have to give back a Mercedes...for a Bimmer. Oh, the horror.

 

[Wireless1]

Yes, our coaches will just quit caring, open up their left-sided brains for Mr. Stupid to appear and then curl up and cry. They might have to give back a Mercedes...for a Bimmer. Oh, the horror.

I should have been a little more precise. Head coaching salaries will reduce some but the real damage will be done at the low end of the coaching curve. New coaches won't have an opportunity. Would Niedermeyer or Osovet have a place in college football to develop their coaching skills without the overall payroll - you'll lose the player development and quality control guys, not the head coaches and coordinators, hence less one on one coaching....... you know some of the positions these guys who don't make it in the NFL take......

 

[05_never_again]

It would not shock me to learn that these players don't know the difference between profit and revenue. Which is a commentary on the quality of education they have been getting.

They probably don't, and more people than you would think who aren't students don't. However, all these CBAs that the unions have negotiated with the league do allocate a percentage of revenue, not profit, to the players. I'm sure that's where they are getting it from.

 

[LSU-SIU]

The large $$$ sports are over, most of college sports will not be drastically impacted as its just amateur competition and many of the rules don't even exist for many of them. The days of limiting money flow to the players is basically over, the ability of the colleges to get together and use the NCAA as a tool for impeding trade is probably coming to an end. With that competitiveness of the big $$$ sports will come crashing down.

The players not being under contract is a dual edge knife, nothing stopping players from just walking off the field in mass when the game starts. (something I suggested I believe last year)

The schools have it coming on many levels, although we might not like the way its playing out. The schools actually created these problems, and there is no easy fix to put the big $$$ sports back together.

 

[MAUSERWERKE]

The large $$$ sports are over, most of college sports will not be drastically impacted as its just amateur competition and many of the rules don't even exist for many of them. The days of limiting money flow to the players is basically over, the ability of the colleges to get together and use the NCAA as a tool for impeding trade is probably coming to an end. With that competitiveness of the big $$$ sports will come crashing down.

The players not being under contract is a dual edge knife, nothing stopping players from just walking off the field in mass when the game starts. (something I suggested I believe last year)

The schools have it coming on many levels, although we might not like the way its playing out. The schools actually created these problems, and there is no easy fix to put the big $$$ sports back together.

Do you not think there is a scenario where the big money college sports get spun off into a semi pro kind of league? How teams could continue to be affiliated with particular schools, I don't know, but I think this is a plausible scenario. There is too much money at stake for interested parties to just walk away.

 

[OrangeVolMan]

Do you not think there is a scenario where the big money college sports get spun off into a semi pro kind of league? How teams could continue to be affiliated with particular schools, I don't know, but I think this is a plausible scenario. There is too much money at stake for interested parties to just walk away.

No. Are you going to donate money to a semi-pro team, I’m not. Are you going to follow a semi-pro team the way you follow college football? I’m not. The money in the system would be greatly reduced if it was semi-pro. For example, Peyton and the Haslam’s are not going to donate millions of dollars to support a semi-pro team. I’m not talking about buying a team, they donate money to UT.

 

[dobre_shunka]

It's going to be a blast when all these characters start to fill jobs in the real world with these attitudes fostered in college.

Now excuse me, there are some kids on my lawn I need to yell at.

 

[dobre_shunka]

It would not shock me to learn that these players don't know the difference between profit and revenue. Which is a commentary on the quality of education they have been getting.

I bet if you asked AOC and a bunch of other politicians, they wouldn't know either.

 

[05_never_again]

Do you not think there is a scenario where the big money college sports get spun off into a semi pro kind of league? How teams could continue to be affiliated with particular schools, I don't know, but I think this is a plausible scenario. There is too much money at stake for interested parties to just walk away.

Maybe I'm misreading this, but it seems like college basketball has the most to lose. College baseball (it isn't a huge revenue producer anyway) I imagine would be completely unaffected by a superleague as many top high school players go straight to professional baseball already. The NFL has relied on colleges to develop their talent and doesn't have any kind of minor league structure whatsoever. I'm sure they'd continue to be perfectly happy with letting colleges set up a superleague and run it without them having to do a thing.

Basketball, however, is in a really interesting position. The NBA has a minor league system, but very very few top prospects bypass a year in college to go straight to the G League. That's already starting to change with players like Jalen Green. College basketball, even if it broke off and formed a superleague, would have to compete with the G League for high school prospects. Some would go to college, sure, but a bunch would not. If that occurred, then I could see college basketball becoming more like college baseball in terms of the talent pool - many of what would be the elite college basketball players are in the G League, and college basketball has more trouble creating buzz and interest than it used to.

 

[Wireless1]

Maybe I'm misreading this, but it seems like college basketball has the most to lose. College baseball (it isn't a huge revenue producer anyway) I imagine would be completely unaffected by a superleague as many top high school players go straight to professional baseball already. The NFL has relied on colleges to develop their talent and doesn't have any kind of minor league structure whatsoever. I'm sure they'd continue to be perfectly happy with letting colleges set up a superleague and run it without them having to do a thing.

Basketball, however, is in a really interesting position. The NBA has a minor league system, but very very few top prospects bypass a year in college to go straight to the G League. That's already starting to change with players like Jalen Green. College basketball, even if it broke off and formed a superleague, would have to compete with the G League for high school prospects. Some would go to college, sure, but a bunch would not. If that occurred, then I could see college basketball becoming more like college baseball in terms of the talent pool - many of what would be the elite college basketball players are in the G League, and college basketball has more trouble creating buzz and interest than it used to.

I think you've nailed it. Look at the reduction in MLB farm teams since players are realizing they can delay the signing bonus, go to school and develop as well. Miss 3 years of bus travel, while spending time with the coeds at keggers.