If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   Judge rules that NCAA players' lawsuit seeking a cut of the television revenue pie that the NCAA itself gets can go forward. Speculate on what might happen to college sports to the right, though also assume that Duke sucks   (espn.go.com) divider line 68
    More: Interesting, Judges' Rules, NCAA, college sports, Oscar Robertson, Bill Russell, economic model, Hausfeld LLC  
•       •       •

705 clicks; posted to Sports » on 30 Jan 2013 at 10:21 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



68 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-30 10:24:41 AM
The NCAA will figure out a way to continue to screw the athletes out of the money.

Nothing will happen to college sports. Duke will continue to suck
 
2013-01-30 10:24:53 AM
TV revenues will be split 50/50 with the players and the school.

All players from all sports will get an even share of the money.

The money will be put in an escrow account that the player can not dip into until he/she graduates.

If an "student-athlete" does not graduate, the money goes back to the school.
 
2013-01-30 10:27:10 AM
As somebody who'll be in debt for the rest of my life because of college, I wish I had as much amateur status as an alleged adult playing a child's game is granted.
 
2013-01-30 10:27:31 AM
They are asking for the money directly from the NCAA, for live games?
How long into a ruling stating that a 5 second delay is not a 'live event'?
 
2013-01-30 10:28:40 AM
into? wtf...

Meant to be until.
 
2013-01-30 10:28:58 AM
Broktun
TV revenues will be split 50/50 with the players and the school.

All players from all sports will get an even share of the money.

The money will be put in an escrow account that the player can not dip into until he/she graduates.

If an "student-athlete" does not graduate, the money goes back to the school.


Then it is okay for pro teams to load them up with gifts and incentives but they wont actually get them till they graduate.
It is a pretty fine line.
 
2013-01-30 10:29:03 AM

Broktun: TV revenues will be split 50/50 with the players and the school.

All players from all sports will get an even share of the money.

The money will be put in an escrow account that the player can not dip into until he/she graduates.

If an "student-athlete" does not graduate, the money goes back to the school.


Holy crap, that actually sounds sane and reasonable.

Never happen.
 
2013-01-30 10:30:22 AM

EyeballKid: As somebody who'll be in debt for the rest of my life because of college, I wish I had as much amateur status as an alleged adult playing a child's game is granted.


Too bad your English Lit degree doesn't generate the money for the college the child's game does, or you might be granted an amateur status and a scholarship.
 
2013-01-30 10:31:39 AM

js34603: EyeballKid: As somebody who'll be in debt for the rest of my life because of college, I wish I had as much amateur status as an alleged adult playing a child's game is granted.

Too bad your English Lit degree doesn't generate the money for the college the child's game does, or you might be granted an amateur status and a scholarship.


I know, right? Stupid reading!!! How did I not realize putting a ball in a hole was a far greater academic endeavor?
 
2013-01-30 10:34:43 AM

Random Anonymous Blackmail: Then it is okay for pro teams to load them up with gifts and incentives but they wont actually get them till they graduate.


Well, why would a pro team load up somebody they haven't drafted and could get hurt with gifts? Sort of a crap shoot, don't you think?
 
2013-01-30 10:35:57 AM

mitchcumstein1: Broktun: TV revenues will be split 50/50 with the players and the school.

All players from all sports will get an even share of the money.

The money will be put in an escrow account that the player can not dip into until he/she graduates.

If an "student-athlete" does not graduate, the money goes back to the school.

Holy crap, that actually sounds sane and reasonable.

Never happen.


Tying compensation for work already performed to future, unrelated performance is neither sane nor reasonable.
 
2013-01-30 10:39:28 AM
Most all non-revenue generating sports will fold.
 
2013-01-30 10:39:40 AM

MFAWG: mitchcumstein1: Broktun: TV revenues will be split 50/50 with the players and the school.

All players from all sports will get an even share of the money.

The money will be put in an escrow account that the player can not dip into until he/she graduates.

If an "student-athlete" does not graduate, the money goes back to the school.

Holy crap, that actually sounds sane and reasonable.

Never happen.

Tying compensation for work already performed to future, unrelated performance is neither sane nor reasonable.


So if company X offers to pay my student loans and give me a job after college if I maintain at 3.8 GPA, I shouldn't take it?
 
2013-01-30 10:40:18 AM
I'm not into college sports at all but my question would be .. if you're getting an academic scholarship to a school then you're already getting assets to perform athletics. I didn't get to go to college for free. I had to pay for my education and all these athletes get it for free from 3 or so sources. Donations etc, athletic licenses (clothing, broadcasts, etc), and people like me who didn't get a free ride.

js34603: The NCAA will figure out a way to continue to screw the athletes out of the money.


So based on the above statement how are athletes "screwed" out of any money? Let's take Duke for instance.. That's $200k in education they got for free. I would say that's an ample income for someone who doesn't even have a degree yet. How long did it take you before you made $50k a year?
 
2013-01-30 10:41:11 AM
So much of this is based on the pretense that there is a lot more money floating around in college athletics than there actually is. The vast majority of Div 1A schools spend more on athletics than they bring in; most Div 1A football programs don't even pay for themselves. The TV money coming in already is going to the students in the form of scholarships, cash, and other benefits.
 
2013-01-30 10:41:27 AM

MFAWG: mitchcumstein1: Broktun: TV revenues will be split 50/50 with the players and the school.

All players from all sports will get an even share of the money.

The money will be put in an escrow account that the player can not dip into until he/she graduates.

If an "student-athlete" does not graduate, the money goes back to the school.

Holy crap, that actually sounds sane and reasonable.

Never happen.

Tying compensation for work already performed to future, unrelated performance is neither sane nor reasonable.


They are being compensated for the work they're performing. They are given a free education, should they choose to use it, housing, meals, clothing, travel, job training, the opportunity for future employers to see them ply their wares, and I would assume still get their monthly scholarship stipend. The other stuff could be seen as a retirement package.
 
2013-01-30 10:41:36 AM

Broktun: TV revenues will be split 50/50 with the players and the school.

All players from all sports will get an even share of the money.

The money will be put in an escrow account that the player can not dip into until he/she graduates.

If an "student-athlete" does not graduate, the money goes back to the school.


I've been saying this for years. Also, if an athlete signs a pro contract he does not get his share.
 
2013-01-30 10:42:43 AM

Ponzholio: Most all non-revenue generating sports will fold.


Or go to the club level.
 
2013-01-30 10:43:26 AM
If the NCAA starts portioning out revenues to the SCHOOLS (not the players), would there still be a problem?  We could pay their tuition - they get "money", but nothing useful to pawn when they get in hock. Any overages go to funding scholarships for the rest of the school - poor kids' first, then merit-based. Or we could pay them, but I don't see that turning into a gigantic shiatshow within 5 years. No siree.

I just don't see how players - already elevated to Local God status by public institutions - are exploited en masse. Maybe more from football and basketball programs (and then, only the big ones), but paying them potentially thousands of dollars for the game, further marginalizing their already-a-joke academics (again, most of the time) is not going to help anything.

Maybe divest colleges from the sports business entirely, and make the "NCAA" a private affair that runs its own league independent of the schools (they could still make "being enrolled at an accredited institution" a rule, right?). That'd be win-win-win - the players will be treated like anyone else who wants a part-time job in college, the schools can stop wasting money on programs that exist primarily to fund themselves, they get the shadiness out of their regent boards (it's still there, just now under the purview of law enforcement), the NCAA can stop making ridiculous rules that benefit no one to try and counter the greed motive.

Anyway, the more I read about college sports, the less I care for them. I was a die-hard Terp fan in college, but collegiate sports is the biggest shiatpile of immoral suckasses (I'm speaking mostly about coaches/ADs and NCAA rulesmakers) that don't sit on F500 boards.

// and actually, some do
 
2013-01-30 10:46:33 AM

xynix: So based on the above statement how are athletes "screwed" out of any money?


They get screwed when the NCAA uses it's RICO exemption to profit from rules that they themselves arbitrate, and have demonstrated that they act with the best interests of profitability at heart. The student athletes will easily be able to demonstrate that a self policing, self arbitrating governing body who collects massive profits and primarily rules on issues of eligibility does not have it in the best interests of either the tax payer or the student athlete in mind with rules governing, among others, whether or not high profile schools can have players ruled temporarily eligible for corporate sponsors to have a more profitable bowl game, but ineligible for a student athlete to have his currently professional roommate of four years pay for a plane ticket to visit him over the holidays. They'll have to explain why coaches can change schools instantly and with no penalty, but athletes are punished because it makes it harder for the school to protect it's season. They'll have to explain how rules are unevenly interpreted, and how profits are hidden from both the athletes and the tax payer.
 
2013-01-30 10:46:36 AM

EyeballKid: js34603: EyeballKid: As somebody who'll be in debt for the rest of my life because of college, I wish I had as much amateur status as an alleged adult playing a child's game is granted.

Too bad your English Lit degree doesn't generate the money for the college the child's game does, or you might be granted an amateur status and a scholarship.

I know, right? Stupid reading!!! How did I not realize putting a ball in a hole was a far greater academic endeavor?


I see where you're confused. You think athletes enjoy greater benefits than you because of the academic value of their participation in sports.

Well I'll clear it up for you. Athletes don't get scholarships, special dorms, meal plans, and the array of other benefits that come with being an athlete because of the academic value of playing sports. They get those things because they make a lot of money for the school. You don't make shiat for the school, despite the inherent nobility of a degree in 14th century Russian literature. On the bright side, you'll be well qualified to man a Borders or Barnes and Noble register.

Now you don't have to feel persecuted by the athletes anymore. They aren't smarter than you or participating in activities of more academic value than you. They are just worth a lot more than you are to your university. Glad we could clear that up.

/if you're going to be in debt for the rest of your life for your BS (please at least let it be a BS and not a BA), you might want to evaluate your own decisions instead of crying about athletes having amateur status for playing a child's game
 
2013-01-30 10:50:10 AM

js34603: I see where you're confused. You think athletes enjoy greater benefits than you because of the academic value of their participation in sports.

Well I'll clear it up for you. Athletes don't get scholarships, special dorms, meal plans, and the array of other benefits that come with being an athlete because of the academic value of playing sports. They get those things because they make a lot of money for the school. You don't make shiat for the school, despite the inherent nobility of a degree in 14th century Russian literature. On the bright side, you'll be well qualified to man a Borders or Barnes and Noble register.

Now you don't have to feel persecuted by the athletes anymore. They aren't smarter than you or participating in activities of more academic value than you. They are just worth a lot more than you are to your university. Glad we could clear that up.

/if you're going to be in debt for the rest of your life for your BS (please at least let it be a BS and not a BA), you might want to evaluate your own decisions instead of crying about athletes having amateur status for playing a child's game


Kudos on your defending an ongoing corrupt practice. I assume ethics wasn't your major.
 
2013-01-30 10:51:07 AM

Dr Dreidel: If the NCAA starts portioning out revenues to the SCHOOLS (not the players), would there still be a problem? We could pay their tuition - they get "money", but nothing useful to pawn when they get in hock. Any overages go to funding scholarships for the rest of the school - poor kids' first, then merit-based. Or we could pay them, but I don't see that turning into a gigantic shiatshow within 5 years. No siree.

I just don't see how players - already elevated to Local God status by public institutions - are exploited en masse. Maybe more from football and basketball programs (and then, only the big ones), but paying them potentially thousands of dollars for the game, further marginalizing their already-a-joke academics (again, most of the time) is not going to help anything.



It really boils down to them being allowed to restrict a student athlete's right to make a profit from what they are essentially in a job training program for. Any other intern is a allowed to get a job with any other employer, whenever they want. However, because we want to make a huge profit off student athletes, and because we want to be able to gamble on their games, we need athletes to follow a special set of rules which hasn't kept up with the inflation of the profits we force them to sign away if they want to receive a college education in the United States at any major university on a scholarship. An accounting major could finish school on the payroll of a major firm looking to hire them. Can't let a player be drafted and then finish school anyway, because of financial hardship. That'd ruin the "integrity" of our gambling.
 
2013-01-30 10:53:37 AM

Mr Guy: xynix: So based on the above statement how are athletes "screwed" out of any money?

They get screwed when the NCAA uses it's RICO exemption to profit from rules that they themselves arbitrate, and have demonstrated that they act with the best interests of profitability at heart. The student athletes will easily be able to demonstrate that a self policing, self arbitrating governing body who collects massive profits and primarily rules on issues of eligibility does not have it in the best interests of either the tax payer or the student athlete in mind with rules governing, among others, whether or not high profile schools can have players ruled temporarily eligible for corporate sponsors to have a more profitable bowl game, but ineligible for a student athlete to have his currently professional roommate of four years pay for a plane ticket to visit him over the holidays. They'll have to explain why coaches can change schools instantly and with no penalty, but athletes are punished because it makes it harder for the school to protect it's season. They'll have to explain how rules are unevenly interpreted, and how profits are hidden from both the athletes and the tax payer.


This is also why college athletes need a union.
 
2013-01-30 10:56:53 AM

mitchcumstein1: Broktun: TV revenues will be split 50/50 with the players and the school.

All players from all sports will get an even share of the money.

The money will be put in an escrow account that the player can not dip into until he/she graduates.

If an "student-athlete" does not graduate, the money goes back to the school.

Holy crap, that actually sounds sane and reasonable.

Never happen.


well, how many student-athletes are going to find that last semester of college, after all the bowl games are over, to be exceptionally difficult?
 
2013-01-30 10:58:31 AM

Mr Guy: xynix: So based on the above statement how are athletes "screwed" out of any money?

They get screwed when the NCAA uses it's RICO exemption to profit from rules that they themselves arbitrate, and have demonstrated that they act with the best interests of profitability at heart. The student athletes will easily be able to demonstrate that a self policing, self arbitrating governing body who collects massive profits and primarily rules on issues of eligibility does not have it in the best interests of either the tax payer or the student athlete in mind with rules governing, among others, whether or not high profile schools can have players ruled temporarily eligible for corporate sponsors to have a more profitable bowl game, but ineligible for a student athlete to have his currently professional roommate of four years pay for a plane ticket to visit him over the holidays. They'll have to explain why coaches can change schools instantly and with no penalty, but athletes are punished because it makes it harder for the school to protect it's season. They'll have to explain how rules are unevenly interpreted, and how profits are hidden from both the athletes and the tax payer.


Makes sense. I needed interpretation from the medias "It's all about the money!" stance.
 
2013-01-30 11:01:24 AM

EyeballKid: js34603: I see where you're confused. You think athletes enjoy greater benefits than you because of the academic value of their participation in sports.

Well I'll clear it up for you. Athletes don't get scholarships, special dorms, meal plans, and the array of other benefits that come with being an athlete because of the academic value of playing sports. They get those things because they make a lot of money for the school. You don't make shiat for the school, despite the inherent nobility of a degree in 14th century Russian literature. On the bright side, you'll be well qualified to man a Borders or Barnes and Noble register.

Now you don't have to feel persecuted by the athletes anymore. They aren't smarter than you or participating in activities of more academic value than you. They are just worth a lot more than you are to your university. Glad we could clear that up.

/if you're going to be in debt for the rest of your life for your BS (please at least let it be a BS and not a BA), you might want to evaluate your own decisions instead of crying about athletes having amateur status for playing a child's game

Kudos on your defending an ongoing corrupt practice. I assume ethics wasn't your major.


this may be irrelevant, but interesting:

(according to an article i read a while ago, i think in the new yorker, but that might be wrong because it wasn't a longwinded article) english departments are some of the most profitable departments in a university.  the sciences usually run at a loss.

/ that's probably because science labs, profs, grants, etc. cost more
// also maybe because science students get more scholarships
/// either way, english departments make a school more money if you concentrate your view to the balance sheet.
 
2013-01-30 11:07:48 AM

xynix: Makes sense. I needed interpretation from the medias "It's all about the money!" stance.


Short version is that they sell the rights to the player likeness for games, TV commercials, product merchandising, and tons of other revenue streams that didn't exist when the NCAA was set up, but we expect them to maintain a physical shape that requires hours and hours of gym time, care and attention to nutrition, as well as the normal college stuff, act like we care if these guys finish school, but anything that may actually HELP them finish school financially is off limits, because it might be "unfair" to a system that is getting more and more profitable, and coming down harder and harder on silly violations while encouraging a system that actually makes the problem worse, because we have desperate talented kids with a profitable talent who are FORBIDDEN by rules to make any profit unless the NCAA gets the entire thing.

Either the NCAA needs to stop merchandising, or they need to let the kids make money off their own images.
 
2013-01-30 11:07:50 AM

pute kisses like a man: well, how many student-athletes are going to find that last semester of college, after all the bowl games are over, to be exceptionally difficult?


I think the vast majority would be just fine.
 
2013-01-30 11:08:09 AM

Mr Guy: Can't let a player be drafted and then finish school anyway, because of financial hardship. That'd ruin the "integrity" of our gambling.


Um, pro players finish their degrees all the time. They don't, however, get to play in both D-I AND the pros, for obvious reasons (though this should really be self-policing - who wants to get creamed on Saturday for no money, then do it again on Sunday for a million and change?). Unless you mean different sports, in which case I partially agree - though remember how well Deion/Bo's two-sport careers went?

And I'm with you - the first thing that needs to happen is that the NCAA needs to reexamine its rules top to bottom. Make it harder for coaches and easier for players to switch teams in the offseason, review some of the sillier rules about gifts/eligibility, start getting ideas from former players who accepted inappropriate gifts (especially those who ran rings of rule-breakers) on how the system incents the various things it does, and how we can engineer a system where everyone feels like they're getting something in return for the service they provide.
 
2013-01-30 11:12:09 AM
If you get an English scholarship and you write a best selling novel while at school, the school doesn't keep all the money from the book sales. Why should it be different for sports?
 
2013-01-30 11:19:39 AM
The lawyers will make bank, the college kids will get a few coupons for discount bowl tickets or basketball playoffs.
 
2013-01-30 11:22:30 AM

Lost Thought 00: If you get an English scholarship and you write a best selling novel while at school, the school doesn't keep all the money from the book sales. Why should it be different for sports?


That's silly. Nobody gets an English scholarship.
 
2013-01-30 11:28:12 AM

Lost Thought 00: If you get an English scholarship and you write a best selling novel while at school, the school doesn't keep all the money from the book sales. Why should it be different for sports?


Not only that, but if you are getting an English scholarship you can go pro in English and make money while keeping the scholarship. If people want to buy tweed sport jackets with your name and number on them, you can make money off that as an English major with no ramifications. If EA wants to put you on the cover of NCAA English Lit '13, you can get paid for that without losing your scholarship.

An athlete can't be paid for any of those things.
 
2013-01-30 11:30:42 AM
NCAA players are the best slave laborers ever. They think it's an honor to be the product.
 
2013-01-30 11:37:45 AM
I was really on the side of the kids for a long time since there is a lot of money going around - but I recently changed my mind.

If you don't want to play for the current terms (free ride to college with restrictions) don't do it - find something else to d - with one big IF

That is if the NCAA does not get involved in trying to get pro teams to put age limits on when players can enter their leagues. Want to join the NFL at 18 go for it - now if the NFL says they have an age limit and it is not due to the NCAA at all, then the 18 year old needs to figure out risk reward.
 
2013-01-30 11:38:05 AM

Dr Dreidel: Mr Guy: Can't let a player be drafted and then finish school anyway, because of financial hardship. That'd ruin the "integrity" of our gambling.

Um, pro players finish their degrees all the time. They don't, however, get to play in both D-I AND the pros, for obvious reasons (though this should really be self-policing - who wants to get creamed on Saturday for no money, then do it again on Sunday for a million and change?). Unless you mean different sports, in which case I partially agree - though remember how well Deion/Bo's two-sport careers went?

And I'm with you - the first thing that needs to happen is that the NCAA needs to reexamine its rules top to bottom. Make it harder for coaches and easier for players to switch teams in the offseason, review some of the sillier rules about gifts/eligibility, start getting ideas from former players who accepted inappropriate gifts (especially those who ran rings of rule-breakers) on how the system incents the various things it does, and how we can engineer a system where everyone feels like they're getting something in return for the service they provide.


Not talking about finishing in your spare time, like any other professional. I'm talking about how it'd clearly be beneficial to these kids to have programs set up where they can make what they are worth to get exposure to say, Nike, Reebok, ESPN, or even be an "intern" to a pro team over the summer, and then go back to school and play for their college for all four years. That's how every other degree program does internships, but we somehow think that they'd be tainted by the experience, and unable to make rational decisions if we KNOW who they are in contact with because it's not a secret and illegal anymore. Really, though, they don't want a play to have that kind of leverage over his coach or his school, when his brand is temporarily stronger than theirs.
 
2013-01-30 11:39:27 AM

Mr Guy: xynix: Makes sense. I needed interpretation from the medias "It's all about the money!" stance.

Short version is that they sell the rights to the player likeness for games, TV commercials, product merchandising, and tons of other revenue streams that didn't exist when the NCAA was set up, but we expect them to maintain a physical shape that requires hours and hours of gym time, care and attention to nutrition, as well as the normal college stuff, act like we care if these guys finish school, but anything that may actually HELP them finish school financially is off limits, because it might be "unfair" to a system that is getting more and more profitable, and coming down harder and harder on silly violations while encouraging a system that actually makes the problem worse, because we have desperate talented kids with a profitable talent who are FORBIDDEN by rules to make any profit unless the NCAA gets the entire thing.

Either the NCAA needs to stop merchandising, or they need to let the kids make money off their own images.


Makes even more sense.. Their likeness being used in Xbox games for example and their names, etc. So yes they should be getting paid for that aspect.
 
2013-01-30 11:42:16 AM

Lost Thought 00: If you get an English scholarship and you write a best selling novel while at school, the school doesn't keep all the money from the book sales. Why should it be different for sports?


I know this is a facetious comment, but if you bring money in while attending school for your academic work (via grants) the school gets 10% right off the top (if I remember the numbers correctly, though it might vary by school) right off the top.

Seems like you could treat TV contracts like a grant, right?

/NSF kindly does the math and puts it on top of your grant request
//Others make you remember that step yourself...which can make for a 10% whoopsie in your budget
 
2013-01-30 11:45:28 AM

js34603: Now you don't have to feel persecuted by the athletes anymore. They aren't smarter than you or participating in activities of more academic value than you. They are just worth a lot more than you are to your university. Glad we could clear that up.


Except for being almost completely wrong, you're right.  I understand that the best teams tend to get the most media exposure so you're locked into the idea that every university out there has a profitable athletic department.  The reality is that even the richest programs spend so much money that they're only marginally profitable, and there are hundreds of schools whose athletic departments operate deeply in the red.  Way too many of them subsidize their football programs with tuition.

If you go to a school like Michigan, the football program pays for itself and subsidizes the other sports programs. . . but that's about it.  The students are on their own.  And if you go to Backwater-But-Want-To-Play-With-The-Big-Boys U with a scummy AD?  Odds are the football players are worth far less than the students by your own logic.

Rhypskallion: NCAA players are the best slave laborers ever. They think it's an honor to be the product.


I think the problem was allowing it to become a product in the first place.  The money led to corruption, the corruption led to protection, the protection led to scandals like boys getting raped in showers.  I lurve football but at the end of the day it's a goddamn game.  I'm OK with the NFL being a business but the fact that they won't organize a minor league doesn't mean "student-athlete" should be reduced to a farce.
 
2013-01-30 11:54:16 AM

Mr Guy: Not talking about finishing in your spare time, like any other professional. I'm talking about how it'd clearly be beneficial to these kids to have programs set up where they can make what they are worth to get exposure to say, Nike, Reebok, ESPN, or even be an "intern" to a pro team over the summer, and then go back to school and play for their college for all four years. That's how every other degree program does internships, but we somehow think that they'd be tainted by the experience, and unable to make rational decisions if we KNOW who they are in contact with because it's not a secret and illegal anymore. Really, though, they don't want a play to have that kind of leverage over his coach or his school, when his brand is temporarily stronger than theirs.


For pro football, the limiting factor is schedule. Again, who in their right mind physically can handle getting jacked up on Saturday for a D-1 school, then manhandled by a pro D the next day?

Are we pissed because Reebok can't market Tebow until he turns pro? I'm with you - selling your name/likeness should be an absolute thing (i.e. no one else can do it for you, like the way the NCAA sells their players' likenesses in video games).
 
2013-01-30 11:58:51 AM

js34603: Lost Thought 00: If you get an English scholarship and you write a best selling novel while at school, the school doesn't keep all the money from the book sales. Why should it be different for sports?

Not only that, but if you are getting an English scholarship you can go pro in English and make money while keeping the scholarship. If people want to buy tweed sport jackets with your name and number on them, you can make money off that as an English major with no ramifications. If EA wants to put you on the cover of NCAA English Lit '13, you can get paid for that without losing your scholarship.

An athlete can't be paid for any of those things.


I'd play the hell out of NCAA English Lit '13, but I though English Lit '12 went way to heavy on Shakespeare. Throw in some Chaucer or Tolkien at least, EA!
 
2013-01-30 12:01:45 PM
TRUST FUND, baby. Every minute you're on the court on TV, you get $X. Put it in the bank, get it when you turn 25. Make it a vesting system so that you have to be on the roster X years or play Y minutes before getting paid.
 
2013-01-30 12:10:29 PM
Players don't deserve one cent from this money.

If they wanted to be paid for playing games they should have gone pro. They decided to take a scholarship (to get an education for free, to improve their game to go pro, fro love of the school, whatever).

We have enough problems with student athletes being treated more like athletes.
 
2013-01-30 12:14:05 PM

Broktun: If an "student-athlete" does not graduate, the money goes back to the school.


That kind of encourages schools to go after guys that aren't good at school and provides for a LOT of potential abuse of the system by schools.

p the boiler: That is if the NCAA does not get involved in trying to get pro teams to put age limits on when players can enter their leagues. Want to join the NFL at 18 go for it - now if the NFL says they have an age limit and it is not due to the NCAA at all, then the 18 year old needs to figure out risk reward.


That's how it is already (though NFL rules just say you have to have been out of HS for 3 years). You can still play in any of the other professional football leagues at 18. They just pay you less than college currently does.


I do think that, if the amount cuts into profits enough, that might create an incentive for schools to actually get student-athletes instead of just athletes - if you can't make a hell of a lot of money off of people, why bother bringing them into the school and risking getting caught cheating to let them pass their classes (not that this has proved particularly difficult)?

I know that no one's willing to be the one who gives up millions...but I also know that if outside forces require that they give up millions, people will surely stick it to someone else lower on the food chain if they can. I'm all up for continuing the student-athlete tradition and letting someone else figure out what they want to do with the pre-NFL/NBA track. Hey entrepreneurs, you just got a huge opportunity!

BTW, I guess this could be the end of schools footing the bill for these marketing campaigns for Heisman winners. That would be nice.
 
2013-01-30 12:17:48 PM

LucklessWonder: js34603: Lost Thought 00: If you get an English scholarship and you write a best selling novel while at school, the school doesn't keep all the money from the book sales. Why should it be different for sports?

Not only that, but if you are getting an English scholarship you can go pro in English and make money while keeping the scholarship. If people want to buy tweed sport jackets with your name and number on them, you can make money off that as an English major with no ramifications. If EA wants to put you on the cover of NCAA English Lit '13, you can get paid for that without losing your scholarship.

An athlete can't be paid for any of those things.

I'd play the hell out of NCAA English Lit '13, but I though English Lit '12 went way to heavy on Shakespeare. Throw in some Chaucer or Tolkien at least, EA!


The whole series went into the toilet once EA acquired the exclusive licenses. There used to be great competition each year between English Lit 2013 and Sega's 2K English Lit series, but now EA has just gotten lazy.
 
2013-01-30 12:18:37 PM

xynix: Makes even more sense.. Their likeness being used in Xbox games for example and their names, etc. So yes they should be getting paid for that aspect.


Jim Brown sued EA Sports because he wanted money for being "RB 44" on the all-time Browns team in Madden. He lost. Major League Baseball sued fantasy leagues that were using player names and statistics without a license. They lost. Tiger Woods sued an artist selling paintings of TW winning the Masters. Tiger lost. I agree that it's scummy for the NCAA to say "we own your image you get nothing" but it EA isn't necessarily obligated to pay the players for the video game anyway.
 
2013-01-30 12:20:33 PM
Anyone care to look up the history of the term "student-athlete"? It's quite telling.
 
2013-01-30 12:25:06 PM

js34603: Lost Thought 00: If you get an English scholarship and you write a best selling novel while at school, the school doesn't keep all the money from the book sales. Why should it be different for sports?

Not only that, but if you are getting an English scholarship you can go pro in English and make money while keeping the scholarship. If people want to buy tweed sport jackets with your name and number on them, you can make money off that as an English major with no ramifications. If EA wants to put you on the cover of NCAA English Lit '13, you can get paid for that without losing your scholarship.

An athlete can't be paid for any of those things.


Your best selling novel, unlike "your" jersey, likeness on video games, and video of you playing have an inherently different worth when they are associated with the school.
 
2013-01-30 12:39:48 PM

IAmRight: if you can't make a hell of a lot of money off of people, why bother bringing them into the school and risking getting caught cheating to let them pass their classes (not that this has proved particularly difficult)?


Even if you get caught, it appears they don't care much anymore, see UNC.
 
Displayed 50 of 68 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report