Started By
Message
Unionization/payments to student-athletes
Posted on 4/9/14 at 4:59 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 4:59 pm
Been trying to figure out my opinion on the topic.
My conclusion is that if the NCAA would just stop being a policing organization and get rid of rules that restrict student-athletes from selling autographs (etc.), signing endorsement deals, and accepting payments from individuals, ala agents/boosters, most other issues would be minor.
Wouldn't this solve most of the issues?
- smaller programs wouldn't have to worry about losing even more money due to increased costs.
- bigger programs wouldn't necessarily gain an advantage by directly paying its players. Most income would be based on individual star power.
- for the vast majority of players, they would still be "amateur" athletes compensated by scholarships, housing, etc.
- this would be applied to all student-athletes, not just football players.
... you get the gist
Certainly would be other unresolved issues, but wouldn't that be a big step in resolving most issues?
My conclusion is that if the NCAA would just stop being a policing organization and get rid of rules that restrict student-athletes from selling autographs (etc.), signing endorsement deals, and accepting payments from individuals, ala agents/boosters, most other issues would be minor.
Wouldn't this solve most of the issues?
- smaller programs wouldn't have to worry about losing even more money due to increased costs.
- bigger programs wouldn't necessarily gain an advantage by directly paying its players. Most income would be based on individual star power.
- for the vast majority of players, they would still be "amateur" athletes compensated by scholarships, housing, etc.
- this would be applied to all student-athletes, not just football players.
... you get the gist
Certainly would be other unresolved issues, but wouldn't that be a big step in resolving most issues?
4
Posted on 4/9/14 at 5:03 pm to BornKjun
I share your opinion.
Don't pay the players, but don't disallow them from marketing themselves and making money off of their accomplishments (i.e. promotional appearances and autograph sessions).
The only pitfall I see with that scenario is with the shady agents and when they can and can't get involved with players.
Don't pay the players, but don't disallow them from marketing themselves and making money off of their accomplishments (i.e. promotional appearances and autograph sessions).
The only pitfall I see with that scenario is with the shady agents and when they can and can't get involved with players.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 5:06 pm to BornKjun
I agree.
The ones who can make some money selling merchandise should be allowed to do so.
If somebody wants to pay 5,000 dollars for an autographed helmet, I don't care.
It does make it a non-deductible expense rather than a Church contribution which is tax deductible. So if we are going to a straight cash basis, we will probably scale back a little to make up for the lack of a tax write off.
The good players will continue to get chargers, suits, iphones, and such.
The ones who can make some money selling merchandise should be allowed to do so.
If somebody wants to pay 5,000 dollars for an autographed helmet, I don't care.
It does make it a non-deductible expense rather than a Church contribution which is tax deductible. So if we are going to a straight cash basis, we will probably scale back a little to make up for the lack of a tax write off.
The good players will continue to get chargers, suits, iphones, and such.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 5:21 pm to Feral
quote:
Don't pay the players, but don't disallow them from marketing themselves and making money off of their accomplishments (i.e. promotional appearances and autograph sessions).
Wont work. Recruiting will be turned upside down by promises of future "work" by big money boosters.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 5:26 pm to kilo
quote:
Wont work. Recruiting will be turned upside down by promises of future "work" by big money boosters.
Pretty much
Oregon will benefit.
For example Phil Knight will fly in on a Nike Helicopter to some 5 star recruits high school and pull out a Nike shoe that will be the recruit's own new Nike shoe line that will go on sale as soon as he signs his letter of intent. It will also be advertised on a giant billboard in Times Square.
Or UCLA/USC come in to some recruit's hometown and promise the recruit can guest star in some upcoming Hollywood blockbusters.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 5:35 pm to goldennugget
Also, what if a player wants to contract with Under Armour but the school has a Nike apparel deal?
Posted on 4/9/14 at 5:42 pm to BornKjun
These issues aren't that complex.
Players will quickly learn to have any promises they base their decisions on written in a contract that the courts would enforce.
As for shoe/apparel endorsements, it really depends what's in the contracts. If the school has a contract with Nike that has certain stipulations, the school would have the athletes sign an agreement stating they can't violate these stipulations. If Under Armour, for instance, can sign a player while avoiding contractual conflicts the school has with Nike-- good for them and the athlete.
Players will quickly learn to have any promises they base their decisions on written in a contract that the courts would enforce.
As for shoe/apparel endorsements, it really depends what's in the contracts. If the school has a contract with Nike that has certain stipulations, the school would have the athletes sign an agreement stating they can't violate these stipulations. If Under Armour, for instance, can sign a player while avoiding contractual conflicts the school has with Nike-- good for them and the athlete.
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 5:45 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 6:28 pm to BornKjun
Unless sec schools privatize this is so irrelevant. Miami coming back strong... soon
Posted on 4/9/14 at 6:37 pm to ehole
A potential problem is private schools being unionized and public schools not.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News