Started By
Message
re: The political economics of college athletics
Posted on 9/5/14 at 9:41 am to bamafan1001
Posted on 9/5/14 at 9:41 am to bamafan1001
quote:
They don't have that authority
They didn't have the authority to institute Common Core either. The DoE is an agency with no constitutional basis or power.
This is the Federal Government in 2014. They can do anything they damn well please and you will take it up the arse and LIKE IT.
1
Posted on 9/5/14 at 9:43 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
Do people even know the history of the NCAA anymore?
Started out as a government mandate and Dr Dudley (who started what became the SEC) was an original member. After WWII the NCAA used the point shaving scandal in NYC to gain monopolistic control of both football and basketball. This monopoly became the tool of the B1G and to a lesser extent the PCC (now the PAC) and national football on TV was doled out to few teams with heavy favoritism. Walter Byers ruled as a dictator and conferences like the SEC suffered greatly for over a quarter of a century until the revolt in the 1970's.
Schools not in the B1G or PAC revolted in the 1970's and 3 events broke the monopoly forever :
#1 ESPN formed and the ACC and Big East benefitted
#2 NCAA vs Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma
#3 CFA formed to the benefit of the SEC, Big 8, SWC, and IND's
Had Walter Byers not pimped the B1G and PAC for a quarter of a century at the expense of the rest of CFB the NCAA would probably still have control of football the way they still do in college basketball. Rupp was so furious at what happened in the NIT that he vowed never to go back and the NCAA used him as a cornerstone to make March Madness what it is today.
Didn't know a lot of this.
Thanks for the history.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:29 am to White Tiger
It would be nice to know how much of that is actual profit for the NCAA, though. This is a typical news story -- they have the hook (almost one billion dollars! WOW!) but it feels dishonest because they don't give us all the information. It could just be lazy journalism, but until they do give us all the information, we're not morally wrong in assuming it's possible that they're hiding mitigating factors.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:34 am to BamaGradinTn
quote:
Hell will literally freeze over long before the U.S. Department of Education ever allows this to happen
are you serious? the DOE doesn't regulate college athletics. or are you just one of those federal govt. haters that make shite up and convince yourself that they are true.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:39 am to White Tiger
quote:
The NCAA is a monopoly. Monopolies by their very nature are corrupt
man, any school that wants out can get out. do you even know what an ASSOCIATION is? if all of the schools left the NCAA another self regulating body would be formed and the next thing you know everything is the same as when the NCAA ran it.
reform needs to be from within. the schools themselves control that. the problem YOU are not understanding is that NOT ALL SCHOOLS feel the same way as you do. news flash.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:40 am to White Tiger
quote:
I think the time that the money made from it be distributed to the athletes who make it possible is long over due.
It is distributed to them in the form of scholarships, books, food, housing etc.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:49 am to cokebottleag
quote:
They didn't have the authority to institute Common Core either.
Oh Lord you're one of those people. Common Core is not instituted by the federal government, it was an initiative developed by the National Governors Association and promoted by the DOE. It's not a communist plot
Posted on 9/5/14 at 11:22 am to randomways
quote:
It would be nice to know how much of that is actual profit for the NCAA, though. This is a typical news story -- they have the hook (almost one billion dollars! WOW!) but it feels dishonest because they don't give us all the information. It could just be lazy journalism, but until they do give us all the information, we're not morally wrong in assuming it's possible that they're hiding mitigating factors.
It's a non-for-profit - I actually didn't know a lot of this. ETA for the TL;DR Crowd: yeah, they took in $1B in reveues, and basically paid out $500M between scholarships/student aid, donating to universities so that they can have sports teams, donating to unprofitable conferences (who doesn't like a good wednesday night CUSA game?),and improving academic programs (would LOVE to see how this breaks down). So basically if I'm reading this correctly, it costs $500m to operate the NCAA (not too farfetched), and they donate $500M back to the kids / schools.
quote:
As a non-profit organization, we put our money where our mission is: equipping student-athletes to succeed on the playing field, in the classroom and throughout life.
The NCAA and our member colleges and universities together award $2.7 billion in athletic scholarships every year to more than 150,000 student-athletes.
In addition, we provide almost $100 million each year to support student-athletes’ academic pursuits and assist them with the basic needs of college life, such as a computer, clothing or emergency travel expenses.
We also put on 89 championships in 23 sports, protect student-athletes with catastrophic-injury insurance coverage and fund a number of scholarship, grant and internship programs.
Television and marketing rights fees, primarily from the Division I men’s basketball championship, generate the majority of our revenue. Championship ticket sales provide most of the remaining dollars. A small percentage of that revenue is used to operate the NCAA’s national office, including the operation of championship events. But in the end, more than 90 cents of every dollar the NCAA generates goes to our member institutions to support student-athletes
Link to their finances
This post was edited on 9/5/14 at 11:28 am
Posted on 9/5/14 at 11:48 am to bamafan1001
quote:
bamafan1001
The political economics of college athletics
quote:
quote:I think the time that the money made from it be distributed to the athletes who make it possible is long over due. Hell will literally freeze over long before the U.S. Department of Education ever allows this to happen.
They don't have that authority
You do understand that the USDOE is the branch of the federal government that enforces Title IX, right? And that the USDOE is the agency that allocates federal dollars to universities, right?
The USDOE has a helluva lot more authority than the NCAA. In fact, any authority the NCAA may have only derives from whatever authority the USDOE allows the NCAA to have. The NCAA can't just set aside federal law.
Dig around a little bit. Look into the group that organized the College Athletes Players Association. See if you can find anyone who has either owned or conceived a uterus. There's a reason why.
From their webpage, here's the bio of the founder:
"Huma also co-authored groundbreaking studies that made national headlines such as “The $6 Billion Heist: Robbing College Athletes Under the Guise of Amateurism”. The study estimates that the fair market value of FBS football and men’s basketball players is approximately $137,000 and $289,000 respectively; and that the NCAA will deny these athletes approximately $6 billion of their fair market value between 2011-15."
The guy apparently has never, ever, heard of Title IX.
If the question is, should all athletes...male and female...be paid a $1,000 a month stipend, for example, then yes, that's a discussion that can be had and the NCAA could approve.
If the question is, should football players and basketball players be paid their "fair market value" or should more money be "distributed to the athletes who make it possible", it's a pointless discussion until Title IX is overturned, which won't happen until after hell freezes over.
Personally, I don't understand why there is so much discussion of paying players according to their "market value"...as if such a thing would be possible even if the NCAA was 100% in favor of it. It's as if some people, including sportswriters at the national level, have never even heard of Title IX.
Now, maybe when the GOP takes back the Senate in November and the White House in 2016...
This post was edited on 9/5/14 at 12:01 pm
Posted on 9/5/14 at 11:53 am to StopRobot
quote:
Oh Lord you're one of those people. Common Core is not instituted by the federal government,
No, the federal government blackmailed the states with Race to the Top money...just like the federal government always does. $4.35 billion of federal tax dollars that states would not get unless they committed to adopting Common Core.
It's like states setting the drinking age at 21. Can a state set the drinking age at 18? Sure...but the federal government won't give that state any federal highway dollars.
So don't come in here and say that Common Core wasn't "instituted" by the federal government. Do a little research. Rather than just calling someone "one of those people", educate yourself. When the federal government blackmails states with billions of dollars, that's exactly what the federal government is doing.
This post was edited on 9/5/14 at 12:02 pm
Posted on 9/5/14 at 12:28 pm to Cheese Grits
Posted on 9/5/14 at 12:32 pm to BamaGradinTn
Make no mistake, Common Core is brought to you by the same people who created "No Child Left Behind".
Posted on 9/5/14 at 12:37 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
If the question is, should football players and basketball players be paid their "fair market value" or should more money be "distributed to the athletes who make it possible", it's a pointless discussion until Title IX is overturned, which won't happen until after hell freezes over.
If this is true, then what does that say about the land of the free and the home of the brave if one may not be permitted by the government to receive one's due with respect to making a living? Do these people not have the right to do that or is the NCAA and its enablers, read fed gov, prevent anything that resembles freedom from happening? A right to pursue a livelihood is nearly the same a one's right to live, no?
Posted on 9/5/14 at 12:40 pm to StopRobot
quote:
promoted by the DOE.
Is this not fed gov? Of course the feds are behind it. Wow.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 1:01 pm to ironsides
quote:
But in the end, more than 90 cents of every dollar the NCAA generates goes to our member institutions to support student-athletes
If that's true (and if it's not relying on tricky technicalities to define "support") then the NCAA's ROI is better than virtually all actual charities in terms of investment of profits into their target. Hell, there are major charities out there than don't break 10% in that regard. Ninety percent would be amazingly efficient, and using the remainder for operating expenses (salaries, overhead, etc) wouldn't be in the least bit unreasonable.
Of course, all this is contingent upon the NCAA not relying on tricky language to make their claim.
This post was edited on 9/5/14 at 1:03 pm
Posted on 9/5/14 at 1:20 pm to randomways
quote:
Of course, all this is contingent upon the NCAA not relying on tricky language to make their claim.
I am sure it is all above board...
Posted on 9/5/14 at 2:27 pm to White Tiger
Actually no. The people who brought you "no child left behind" were on the other side of the political fence so to speak. That was a George Bush initiative. Ridiculous amount of standardized testing. My we've become a paranoid bunch. - must be that aggie education. Lot's of closeted boys graduate from A&M.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 2:33 pm to White Tiger
quote:
I am sure it is all above board...
I have no idea and even less motivation to research it. That's the reason for the caveat.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:38 pm to White Tiger
quote:
White Tiger
The political economics of college athletics
quote:
If the question is, should football players and basketball players be paid their "fair market value" or should more money be "distributed to the athletes who make it possible", it's a pointless discussion until Title IX is overturned, which won't happen until after hell freezes over.
If this is true, then what does that say about the land of the free and the home of the brave if one may not be permitted by the government to receive one's due with respect to making a living? Do these people not have the right to do that or is the NCAA and its enablers, read fed gov, prevent anything that resembles freedom from happening? A right to pursue a livelihood is nearly the same a one's right to live, no?
It depends on how you define "pursue a livelihood". According to the USDOE, college players are students, not employees. Individuals have every right to go pursue a livelihood...whether it's working at McDonalds or playing in the NFL or NBA. Any high school football player, as soon as they have been out of high school for three years, is free to pursue a livelihood playing in the NFL. Or, they can choose to seek immediate employment with the CFL. Any high school basketball player, as soon as they have been out of high school one year, may pursue a livelihood working in the NBA. Or, they may choose to immediately seek employment playing internationally.
And don't forget...it's the leagues that imposes those age restrictions.
You mention the land of the free and the home of the brave. Players choose...of their own free will...to enroll in colleges and universities, when they don't have to.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 9:05 pm to BamaGradinTn
Dear Alabama fan, what choices do these "students" have. There is only one option-the NCdoublea$$holes. That's it. There is no competing college athletic organization. Further all colleges are caught by the short hairs by the fed gov, no exceptions.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News