Where in College Football is...............

[LouderVol]

But what course would've worked?

Directly compensating or revenue sharing with players by the schools is going to lead to them being classed as employees. That's not going to be a good outcome.

When the Supreme Court tells you the core of your amateur athletic business is flawed, what the heck did you expect them to do?

again, that was too late. the NCAA should have compromised years ago to head off those cases making it to the Supreme Court. maybe had a better leg to stand on in front of the courts instead of having nothing.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

they fought it to the very end, and lost. which created the vacuum. there has been plenty of chances to nibble away at the problem without giving up the whole game. but once it ended up in the Supreme Court, it was all or nothing for the NCAA because they had nothing prepared for their inevitable loss.

if they had compromised we COULD, depending on NCAA ineptitude, have better solutions now. maybe something with contracts worked out. maybe still a limit on transfers. maybe a cap on payment. Now they have absolutely no power to fight any of those. but before they lost they at least had a bargaining position.

to continue the Titanic analogy, they could have turned off the engines, and maybe steered away from the worst of it, while preparing more make shift life boats. instead they were full speed ahead with the captain ignoring the danger ahead.

What you are saying is: the NCAA could've created a pro sports league instead of college athletics. Caps, free agency limits, compensation, etc.

Yes. They could've. They still can but do you think that's a successful outcome?

 

[LouderVol]

What you are saying is: the NCAA could've created a pro sports league instead of college athletics. Caps, free agency limits, compensation, etc.

Yes. They could've. They still can but do you think that's a successful outcome?

it might be one better than what we have. I use might because I don't put it past to the NCAA to screw it up.

our reality now is that no one is in control, and that is a problem in an of itself, that would not exist in a world where the NCAA had compromised and lead.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

But what course would've worked?

Directly compensating or revenue sharing with players by the schools is going to lead to them being classed as employees. That's not going to be a good outcome.

When the Supreme Court tells you the core of your amateur athletic business is flawed, what the heck did you expect them to do?

I think it was entirely possible for them to adjust their archaic rules that allowed for NIL to be just that, NIL. Everyone knew that this was going to turn into pay for play, and it did. Mark Emmert buried his head in the sand, instead of putting together a group of ideas that would’ve kept everything from being the Wild West.

In all honesty, it’s working out pretty well for us and helped get us guys that might’ve looked elsewhere. I’ve never been against guys making money, but I think the combination of uncapped money with yearly free agency is unsustainable. It’s not a good model. No model exists in any sport like it does in the current version of college sports.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

it might be one better than what we have. I use might because I don't put it past to the NCAA to screw it up.

our reality now is that no one is in control, and that is a problem in an of itself, that would not exist in a world where the NCAA had compromised and lead.

Compensating players for playing a sport directly is either pro or semi pro sports. From there, you'll find control for the league (if they can get an antitrust exemption from Congress,) but you can't find anything related to college athletics.

It becomes club sports, at best, but with the school paying....... they're employees.

No other business model exists. "We're going to pay you to play and have salary caps and have free agency control and contracts but no, no, no..... you're not employees."

The NCAA simply could never control things like NIL or transfers legally without destroying the "student athlete" model. They're still trying not to do that and the schools, players, and states are suing them into irrelevance.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I think it was entirely possible for them to adjust their archaic rules that allowed for NIL to be just that, NIL. Everyone knew that this was going to turn into pay for play, and it did. Mark Emmert buried his head in the sand, instead of putting together a group of ideas that would’ve kept everything from being the Wild West.

In all honesty, it’s working out pretty well for us and helped get us guys that might’ve looked elsewhere. I’ve never been against guys making money, but I think the combination of uncapped money with yearly free agency is unsustainable. It’s not a good model. No model exists in any sport like it does in the current version of college sports.

It's not possible to restrict NIL in ANY sport or business beyond "embarrassing to the business" restrictions (endorsing weed, alcohol, etc.) The Supreme Court as much as told them they'd lose any lawsuit to restrict it.

It's not possible and if it legally was, they could've still done it after Alstom was lost. The Court suggested Congress needed to act. Those guys are surely more useless than the NCAA.

It's fine now to suggest "they could've done something" but they couldn't and aren't doing anything to restrict transfers and NIL without states like Tennessee suing them.

And yes, it's oddly creating a little more parity at the top of the sports because LEGALLY we can pay players with the best of them but in doing that and in suing the NCAA at every turn, we're part of the demise.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

It's not possible to restrict NIL in ANY sport or business beyond "embarrassing to the business" restrictions (endorsing weed, alcohol, etc.) The Supreme Court as much as told them they'd lose any lawsuit to restrict it.

It's not possible and if it legally was, they could've still done it after Alstom was lost. The Court suggested Congress needed to act. Those guys are surely more useless than the NCAA.

It's fine now to suggest "they could've done something" but they couldn't and aren't doing anything to restrict transfers and NIL without states like Tennessee suing them.

And yes, it's oddly creating a little more parity at the top of the sports because LEGALLY we can pay players with the best of them but in doing that and in suing the NCAA at every turn, we're part of the demise.

The point is that the pendulum was way on one side and swung dramatically to the other. It didn’t have to do so, but there was a time not so long ago where we were worried that Arian Foster was going to get us in trouble bc he was blabbing about Trooper buying tacos for players . It never had to get to the Supreme Court.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

The point is that the pendulum was way on one side and swung dramatically to the other. It didn’t have to do so, but there was a time not so long ago where we were worried that Arian Foster was going to get us in trouble bc he was blabbing about Trooper buying tacos for players . It never had to get to the Supreme Court.

We'll disagree there. No business or sport restricts dollar amounts on private NIL deals. It's just not legal so once the Supreme Court stopped the NCAA from denying it, it was going to get out of hand.

Players are worth far more than the very valuable scholarship. We paid them under the table for decades to prove that. NIL let it come out of the shadows. It couldn't be regulated legally, even when it WAS being regulated by the NCAA.

There's no "halfsies" on private NIL. Your employer can limit the "immoral" endorsements but if you got an NIL (a TV commercial or ad of some kind,) that's not your employers business and they can't limit how much you make.

It might be popular to say "the NCAA should've compromised" but there is no compromise UNLESS the players become employees and sign contracts willingly to limit NIL, which no pro sport does AKAIK.

It's all revisionist to say otherwise. No one had a plan to limit NIL once it started because there's not a workable way to do it legally.

 

[LouderVol]

Compensating players for playing a sport directly is either pro or semi pro sports. From there, you'll find control for the league (if they can get an antitrust exemption from Congress,) but you can't find anything related to college athletics.

It becomes club sports, at best, but with the school paying....... they're employees.

No other business model exists. "We're going to pay you to play and have salary caps and have free agency control and contracts but no, no, no..... you're not employees."

The NCAA simply could never control things like NIL or transfers legally without destroying the "student athlete" model. They're still trying not to do that and the schools, players, and states are suing them into irrelevance.

if the schools weren't making so much money it wouldn't be a problem. that was the problem for so long. the business wasn't paying the workers, because they didn't "employ" them. and no model existed where a business could restrict the pay of workers who weren't "employed" by them. or heck its difficult to find situations where pay is restricted for workers you employ without some form of contract, and that usually is offset with higher pay or benefits of some such.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

if the schools weren't making so much money it wouldn't be a problem. that was the problem for so long. the business wasn't paying the workers, because they didn't "employ" them. and no model existed where a business could restrict the pay of workers who weren't "employed" by them. or heck its difficult to find situations where pay is restricted for workers you employ without some form of contract, and that usually is offset with higher pay or benefits of some such.

Exactly. And the SCHOOLS sued years ago to get the NCAA to allow them to make their own media deals.

The schools started this.

 

[LouderVol]

Exactly. And the SCHOOLS sued years ago to get the NCAA to allow them to make their own media deals.

The schools started this.

I agree. the NCAA SHOULD have started then, working to get the player's represented. they could have essentially been the players association. that way the players were part of the rules making, and thus less likely to bring a case to the supreme court.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I agree. the NCAA SHOULD have started then, working to get the player's represented. they could have essentially been the players association. that way the players were part of the rules making, and thus less likely to bring a case to the supreme court.

For what? To what end? Compensating them, negotiating with them, and revenue sharing with them would have made legally declared employees decades ago.

If the schools had let the NCAA keep the TV exposure and media deals under wraps, the NCAA could've help keep the big money and big exposure out of college football.

Sure, my lazy butt would either get parked on a bleacher or next to the radio most weeks and I'd not have the joy of watching multiple games every Saturday BUT it would've limited the value players could be worth.

Fans wanted all the TV we could get. Schools wanted all the money they could get. Networks wanted all the ad revenue they could get.

We all got what we wanted.

 

[LouderVol]

For what? To what end? Compensating them, negotiating with them, and revenue sharing with them would have made legally declared employees decades ago.

If the schools had let the NCAA keep the TV exposure and media deals under wraps, the NCAA could've help keep the big money and big exposure out of college football.

Sure, my lazy butt would either get parked on a bleacher or next to the radio most weeks and I'd not have the joy of watching multiple games every Saturday BUT it would've limited the value players could be worth.

Fans wanted all the TV we could get. Schools wanted all the money they could get. Networks wanted all the ad revenue they could get.

We all got what we wanted.

except for the players. the ones making possible.

the fake amateurism existed for a long time. I think it could have kept going without the players being paid by the schools. but that would have required compromise, but there was none. it only got to the courts because there was no compromise. If the schools/NCAA would have budged some, who knows if it ends up in the courts.

yeah MAYBE it ends up exactly like it is today, but it wouldn't have been as abrupt. which imo would have been better.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

except for the players. the ones making possible.

the fake amateurism existed for a long time. I think it could have kept going without the players being paid by the schools. but that would have required compromise, but there was none. it only got to the courts because there was no compromise. If the schools/NCAA would have budged some, who knows if it ends up in the courts.

yeah MAYBE it ends up exactly like it is today, but it wouldn't have been as abrupt. which imo would have been better.

There's just not a lot of wiggle. The NCAA couldn't let schools openly compensate players at all and not have the courts rule them as employees.

Legally, why are you compensating them financially if you aren't making money from their work? If you are making money from their work, why aren't you compensating them financially as employees?

The NCAA was stuck holding to "we don't pay them money so they aren't employees." NIL compensation immediately became an obvious ruse for professional payment organized by the schools. It's a chaotic and unsustainable situation with the open portal that invites tampering and mercenary behavior by the players.

To settle multi-million dollar lawsuits and try to get some control, the NCAA agrees to allow the schools to directly financially compensate players with school sponsored NIL deals with some kind of "revenue sharing" aspect.

The countdown to players becoming legally employees has already started but it will be 100% certain when schools start directly playing athletes. At that point, it's really just another pro league owned by universities.

Can they keep the 4yr eligibility rules intact as a pro league? the class attendance requirements as a pro league?

Schools like UT might want to keep and continue to pay some players beyond 4 years who are great college players but not really NFL material. An aging, but hella experienced, Josh Dobbs could likely run Heupel's offense incredibly well. I suspect some experienced, but a little older, NFL WRs could get separation against SEC competition.

The NCAA had nowhere to go, no compromises that could work that involved financially compensating players. I've not seen anyone who suggested a plan that didn't involve making college look like and function like a professional sports organization.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

We'll disagree there. No business or sport restricts dollar amounts on private NIL deals. It's just not legal so once the Supreme Court stopped the NCAA from denying it, it was going to get out of hand.

Players are worth far more than the very valuable scholarship. We paid them under the table for decades to prove that. NIL let it come out of the shadows. It couldn't be regulated legally, even when it WAS being regulated by the NCAA.

There's no "halfsies" on private NIL. Your employer can limit the "immoral" endorsements but if you got an NIL (a TV commercial or ad of some kind,) that's not your employers business and they can't limit how much you make.

It might be popular to say "the NCAA should've compromised" but there is no compromise UNLESS the players become employees and sign contracts willingly to limit NIL, which no pro sport does AKAIK.

It's all revisionist to say otherwise. No one had a plan to limit NIL once it started because there's not a workable way to do it legally.

It’s not necessarily that we’re disagreeing. The part that I think where there’s a disconnection is that to me there was a massive step or steps that were skipped over from where we were to where we are. It is my opinion that there could’ve been a more simple approach by the NCAA where the student athletes were compensated directly by the NCAA or in a manner that would’ve been a much better deal than they used to have. It could’ve been very simple at least w/ a $ number bc the just about anything was better than what it used to be. You could’ve had a hybrid system where everyone got some money and then had actual NIL, not collectives. I don’t think anyone is trying to cap NIL, as much as they are trying to define it . There are NIL deals, but it’s mostly collectives paying players. In the current model the collectives will eventually run dry. Big $ Boosters will get tired of paying for these guys and good coaches will continue to go the NFL for a less stressful environment where they have a clear view or better view of roster management from one year to the next.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

It’s not necessarily that we’re disagreeing. The part that I think where there’s a disconnection is that to me there was a massive step or steps that were skipped over from where we were to where we are. It is my opinion that there could’ve been a more simple approach by the NCAA where the student athletes were compensated directly by the NCAA or in a manner that would’ve been a much better deal than they used to have. It could’ve been very simple at least w/ a $ number bc the just about anything was better than what it used to be. You could’ve had a hybrid system where everyone got some money and then had actual NIL, not collectives. I don’t think anyone is trying to cap NIL, as much as they are trying to define it . There are NIL deals, but it’s mostly collectives paying players. In the current model the collectives will eventually run dry. Big $ Boosters will get tired of paying for these guys and good coaches will continue to go the NFL for a less stressful environment where they have a clear view or better view of roster management from one year to the next.

The problem is: why are you paying them as athletes if they're not athlete employees of the university or NCAA? The goodness of your heart? Why aren't you paying non-revenue sport athletes? Prepare for the lawyers.

Obviously, it's an employee-employer relationship. They play, you pay. They have a talent, you have a business that exhibits that talent. They're professionals. Likely all of them who play sports for the school...... or none of them, legally.

The NCAA is screwed that way because they don't want to be in the pro sports business because there are a huge amount of schools that can't afford that business. They either leave the NCAA or find a way to compensate a lot of athletes or close down sports. While schools like UT might find a way to pay a lot of athletes, many won't but will be in the same NCAA D1 as UT. Again, prepare for the lawyers.

Compensating athletes directly from the school was always not going to end well and the NCAA knew it and fought it.

There are no "halfway" or "better deal than nothing" for a sports business to legally pay athletes and them not be at least 1099 workers if not regular employees. How?

 

[RDU VOL#14]

The problem is: why are you paying them as athletes if they're not athlete employees of the university or NCAA? The goodness of your heart? Why aren't you paying non-revenue sport athletes? Prepare for the lawyers.

Obviously, it's an employee-employer relationship. They play, you pay. They have a talent, you have a business that exhibits that talent. They're professionals. Likely all of them who play sports for the school...... or none of them, legally.

The NCAA is screwed that way because they don't want to be in the pro sports business because there are a huge amount of schools that can't afford that business. They either leave the NCAA or find a way to compensate a lot of athletes or close down sports. While schools like UT might find a way to pay a lot of athletes, many won't but will be in the same NCAA D1 as UT. Again, prepare for the lawyers.

Compensating athletes directly from the school was always not going to end well and the NCAA knew it and fought it.

There are no "halfway" or "better deal than nothing" for a sports business to legally pay athletes and them not be at least 1099 workers if not regular employees. How?

I don’t know man. All I know is that the NCAA sucks, but it knows how to put on a helluva basketball tournament .