Tom Mars: "The End of the NCAA"

#76
#76
ptcarter said:
There is a chance college football can move too far away from the old model. Here is some extreme examples of where this could lead. First, NCAA does have a good role in the non football sports, say the olympic sports, swimming, softball, golf, tennis, track and field. Rare that a track star or swimmer would be able to market his "name, image and likeness", so over time, those sports (like SEC wrestling that got whacked by Title IX) will evaporate. I'd say that's a shame - there should be a place on college campuses for that sort of thing, so NCAA isn't all bad. (It's the enforcement branch, stupid).

Now a new system will be put in place, and without some rules, it's going to be the schools that can afford the players will get the players, and the others will dry up and blow away. I can see schools like, Vanderbilt, MTSU or even Southern Miss type not having a viable football program in 10 years. And those left standing will be the money schools. It could be that you can pick 10 schools that will rise to the top and those others will evaporate, and these are the blue bloods. The days of an App State upsetting Michigan in the big house will be over. College teams will consist of university employees that have nothing to do with attending any classes. A term you will never hear again is "Academically ineligble". It's college football without the college. Pro teams using college stadiums as a venue. That's where we are now. There is an opportunity to guide this in a direction and I'd like to see it where there is more parity, not less. Transfer portal reform is one good step towards that goal.
Click to expand...
If it is only about money, colleges such as Vanderbilt will have the best football team old money can buy in the next 10 years.
 
#77
#77
Rockytop10nessee said:
Why is “preserving amateurism” even a goal? They act like amateurism is a virtue.

And they’re so disingenuous talking about protecting athletes from exploitation. I mean Jesus Christ read the room, NCaA. Everyone’s look at you, because Y’all have literally been the ones exploiting the atgletes for decades.
Click to expand...
NIL killed amateurism in collegia football. It is officially over with the Supreme Court’s decision. When Inwas in college, in the 1950s, players got new suits, a Summer job that payed above market value for the football players, a hand shake every now and then for about $50-100 a couple of times and, some free food at a number of restaurants around town. Actually, -layers were better off then until their football responsibilities required year round attention. That is when under the table $$$ started in earnest and we ended up where we are today. The NCAA is still trying to enforce rules schools were establish in the 1950s when the playing ground has been turned upside down. All of us have to realize wherevwe are now and determine how we can stay alive in this new world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DixieVol, knox73 and Scottt5
#78
#78
loservol said:
If it is only about money, colleges such as Vanderbilt will have the best football team old money can buy in the next 10 years.
Click to expand...

It won't be Vanderbilt. It'll be Texas, Texas A&M, Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Penn State, and possibly Southern Cal if their alumni care to spend for it, or Oregon if Phil wants to keep financing it.

People vastly VASTLY underestimate not only the amount of money the Big 10 alumni networks have, but how large their alumni bases are. SEC schools won't be incapable of competing against them, but the fact is those schools have an unimaginable amount of money to tap into. And in a long game, you have to wonder just which alumni and donor networks will exhaust themselves first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volbound1700
#79
#79
VOLINVONORE said:
NIL killed amateurism in collegia football. It is officially over with the Supreme Court’s decision. When Inwas in college, in the 1950s, players got new suits, a Summer job that payed above market value for the football players, a hand shake every now and then for about $50-100 a couple of times and, some free food at a number of restaurants around town. Actually, -layers were better off then until their football responsibilities required year round attention. That is when under the table $$$ started in earnest and we ended up where we are today. The NCAA is still trying to enforce rules schools were establish in the 1950s when the playing ground has been turned upside down. All of us have to realize wherevwe are now and determine how we can stay alive in this new world.
Click to expand...
So getting paid under the table still made it amateur???? Then maybe the NCAA should have said long ago there is no way we can keep boosters from paying athletes if they want to pay them. They could have cited it was impossible to fairly govern that which is the truth. They could have said we have no realistic way of keeping a person paying another in various ways. But instead we got selective and cherry picking investigations became the norm. GBO
 
  • Like
Reactions: S.C. OrangeMan
#81
#81
Voltopia said:
It won't be Vanderbilt. It'll be Texas, Texas A&M, Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Penn State, and possibly Southern Cal if their alumni care to spend for it, or Oregon if Phil wants to keep financing it.

People vastly VASTLY underestimate not only the amount of money the Big 10 alumni networks have, but how large their alumni bases are. SEC schools won't be incapable of competing against them, but the fact is those schools have an unimaginable amount of money to tap into. And in a long game, you have to wonder just which alumni and donor networks will exhaust themselves first.
Click to expand...
As long as everyone is willing to keep donating huge sums of discretionary earnings to their uniform of choice, that's all that really matters. Let's see how much of collective GDP we can spend on 17 yo quarterbacks, and then on wagers that the team with red shirts is going to come within 3 points of the team in blue shirts.

It's not enough to enjoy quality sport, we need to prove our love by spending whatever we can to influence the outcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh and Voltopia
#83
#83
loservol said:
If it is only about money, colleges such as Vanderbilt will have the best football team old money can buy in the next 10 years.
Click to expand...
Those short-sighted donors to Vandy tend to donate to the relatively frivolous programs like their Medical School rather than more important things like football.

I've no idea what they're thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CSVol, Scottt5, rdavis007 and 1 other person
#84
#84
savannahfan said:
I'm not so sure that would be such a bad thing.. I think one of the reasons Nick retired (a big one) had to do with his views on the state of college sport amateurism. He seems to be more open on his views on the subject now that he is out of the rat race.
Click to expand...
You can't be serious, Saban would be a disaster. You think for one second Bama was not paying players under the table? And speaking out about nil deals before a player played a down of football, and he did the same thing with Young at qb. yet criticized others for doing it. Saban does not like nil because he had the under the table money covered up by ncaa, and the state of Bama. He wanted nil and tp to be done away with where he could continue to stack 4 and 5 star players on the bench. With the new tp and nil. Nick could see he could no longer do that when all pay is out in the open. Where do you think Pruitt learned from?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT Challenger and basspond
#85
#85
Voltopia said:
It won't be Vanderbilt. It'll be Texas, Texas A&M, Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Penn State, and possibly Southern Cal if their alumni care to spend for it, or Oregon if Phil wants to keep financing it.

People vastly VASTLY underestimate not only the amount of money the Big 10 alumni networks have, but how large their alumni bases are. SEC schools won't be incapable of competing against them, but the fact is those schools have an unimaginable amount of money to tap into. And in a long game, you have to wonder just which alumni and donor networks will exhaust themselves first.
Click to expand...
Imo, nil will take care of itself. Big money will not continue to roll in as it is today. It will get to a respectable amount. The big donors will grow tired of paying out the substantial sums they are doing now.
 
#86
#86
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
I'm not convinced legally, if the players are paid at one college, they can remain unpaid at another.

Despite the massive revenue difference, what's the difference between the athletic department at ETSU vs UT? Why is the effort given by an athlete at UT worthy of pay and the effort at ETSU (or ANY smaller school covered by the NCAA) not?

The revenue programs need to be separate from the schools or they'll ruin it for many, many less talented athletes, students wanting to support their college team, smaller fanbases, and traditions of competition.
Click to expand...
Question…When you remove the revenue sports from the schools, WHO PAYS FOR THE NON REV SPORTS? Santa Claus?
 
#88
#88
Do you think an Olympic selection committee could classify NIL recipients as "pros" rather than "amateurs"?
 
#89
#89
Dadof2Vols said:
Question…When you remove the revenue sports from the schools, WHO PAYS FOR THE NON REV SPORTS? Santa Claus?
Click to expand...
Who pays at most schools which don't make a ton of money like ETSU or Carson-Newman?

For that matter, who pays for the Biology or History or Political Science departments?

That's how far we've gotten from her education mission of schools when it comes to sports. The schools and the fans think sports SHOULD BE profitable businesses. That was never the intent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scottt5
#93
#93
It's not going to be the end of women sports or even non revenue generating mens sports. It will just be like it was in highschool for those sports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CSVol
#94
#94
cgrish said:
Imo, nil will take care of itself. Big money will not continue to roll in as it is today. It will get to a respectable amount. The big donors will grow tired of paying out the substantial sums they are doing now.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. The market will self correct. In the under the table days, a school could spread around a few 100k and get a good team, now we are talking multiple millions. If no return on investment can be shown, business will not participate. At that point the well funded collectives will be very important.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cgrish, Woodlawn VOL and S.C. OrangeMan
#96
#96
B81 said:
Totally agree. The market will self correct. In the under the table days, a school could spread around a few 100k and get a good team, now we are talking multiple millions. If no return on investment can be shown, business will not participate. At that point the well funded collectives will be very important.
Click to expand...
Spot on! GBO
 
#97
#97
This will only be of interest to a minority of VFLs, but I found it a fascinating read (despite the accumulated photocopy quality of the day).

A paper written in 1977 for presentation at a symposium on the History of Sport and Physical Education, by a William P. Freeman (a track and field coach), entitled College Athletics in the Twenties: The Golden Age or Fool's Gold?

When the U.S. committed to send troops to Europe in World War I, the military (and the nation) were aghast at how many male applicants could not pass the initial physical! The military used competitive games to help motivate and prepare soldiers for battle, and this carried over into civilian life after the war.

The 1920s is also when the NCAA and college presidents really began to falter in their missions, as college sports grew rapidly in the booming economy. College sports suddenly began to bring in the kind of money that could buy buildings and equip laboratories!

Here's a pull quote from the presentation, itself quoting the 1929 Carnegie Report on college sports:

Perhaps one development which we often overlook was the change which many academicians and physical educators found most threatening: the gradual replacement of the "value of the struggle" emphasis with the "what was the result" emphasis, a slow loss of sport as valuable because of the means by which it is conducted, replaced by the more controversial interest primarily in the outcome. The point of the program was becoming victory, rather than competition.
Click to expand...

We started out as a nation built on ideals. Throughout its short history, different leaders--whether local or national--would try to lead us back to those ideals. Human nature doesn't change, doesn't "evolve" upward. But neither have things always been as cynical or as accepting of avarice as they are today.

Loading…

files.eric.ed.gov
 
  • Like
Reactions: gnm53108, MemphisVol77 and VFL-82-JP
#99
#99
TnVol! said:
The end of cfb as we know it began way before this court case.
Click to expand...
When the power shifted in college football from the Big 10 to the SEC the writing was on the wall then. It's been a matter of time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CSVol
#100
#100
MontyPython said:
Per Tom Mars, Attorney representing Spyre:

"I think this will be one more brick in the wall that is the end of the NCAA," Mars said. "Short of intervention by Congress, the demise of the NCAA now seems inevitable based on nothing but a financial analysis, as it appears the NCAA is poised to lose all of its upcoming antitrust cases. The cumulative effect of which, could make the NCAA financially insolvent."

"A bad case is a bad case, and they've put all their defenses forward," Mars added. "And there's no precedent anywhere in the United States that supports their defenses."

"Turning upside down rules overwhelmingly supported by member schools will aggravate an already chaotic collegiate environment, further diminishing protections for student-athletes from exploitation," the NCAA said in a statement. "The NCAA fully supports student-athletes making money from their name, image and likeness and is making changes to deliver more benefits to student-athletes, but an endless patchwork of state laws and court opinions make clear partnering with Congress is necessary to provide stability for the future of all college athletes."

Corker said the NCAA's lawyers did not make a compelling argument for why using NIL contracts as recruiting inducements would undermine the academic side of college sports.

"While the NCAA permits student-athletes to profit from their NIL, it fails to show how the timing of when a student-athlete enters such an agreement would destroy the goal of preserving amateurism," the judge wrote.

Time to break out the lifeboats, NCAA.

View attachment 622432
Click to expand...

I wonder if this guy is related to the Mars candy people.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top