off topic-california may pass law to let student athletes get compensated

1000% in favor of letting all students earn money off their name/likeness.

quote:

---

so a few from each school get paid. what about the rest?

---

This is not legislation that is setting out to pay players. It is legislation to prevent a governing body, in this case the NCAA, from preventing its adult constituents from earning a living. Every adult has the right to earn a living, so long as that living is not made criminally.

Honestly, preventing college athletes from profiting from who they are is as unAmerican as a concept can possibly get.

This is the owners of an economic enterprise colluding to prevent by rule the principle workers of said enterprise from profiting from said enterprise - and not only preventing them from profiting from the enterprise itself, but also preventing/limiting them from profiting outside of the enterprise. It's not slavery per se, particularly from the viewpoint of the players - they are not obligated to participate. But from the viewpoint of the folks benefiting at the top, it looks exactly like slavery. They work, you profit. They can't profit. Period.

quote:

---

Honestly, preventing college athletes from profiting from who they are is as unAmerican as a concept can possibly get.

---

Not if they are wearing the Alabama uniform...or any school's uniform.

Do you think people are watching because Joe 5* is playing football or because Joe 5* is playing at Alabama or Ohio State?

but the cali lawmaker that put forth this legislation said specifically, it was based on "fairness". so again i ask, what's fair about a few star players getting paid but not the rest?

quote:

---

Not if they are wearing the Alabama uniform...or any school's uniform.

Do you think people are watching because Joe 5* is playing football or because Joe 5* is playing at Alabama or Ohio State?

---

Doesn't matter. Joe 5* is not the property of the University of Alabama. Sure, he can't be in a TV commercial in his uniform, but he damn well has the right to show up in his own damn skin.

This would be like if the Screen Actors Guild colluded with all of the movie studios to create rules that prevented Matthew McConaughey from selling Buicks, while also severely limiting his salaries from movies to a small, very specific set of benefits. And you being on the side of the movie studios cause because Paramount is your favorite.

Honestly, why would any fan be against paying players? Seriously? They're gonna keep playing the damn games either way, and you are still gonna get to enjoy watching those games...and so why would you be in favor of TV Networks, Universities, Coaches, and the NCAA itself profiting but not the players? What's in it for you to have this opinion? It's patently asinine.

Why don't you want Matthew McConaughey to sell Buicks? The Oscars won't be fair anymore? What's YOUR benefit?

Bingo.

quote:

---

Do you think people are watching because Joe 5* is playing football or because Joe 5* is playing at Alabama or Ohio State?

---

This is honestly completely retarded.

Back in 2008 when CBS was advertising Saturday's game featuring Florida, the TV snippet/commercial didn't have footage of Florida's backup Left Guard. It had footage of Tim Motherfricking Tebow in it while referencing his name both verbally and in writing on the TV screen. So we know that CBS completely disagrees with your assessment that the players don't affect how many eyes tune in.

Back between 2008-2010, the University of Alabama sold a Cambodian queef-load of number 8 jerseys, and it wasn't because the number 8 is so pretty. It was because of Julio Jones. And so the University of Alabama definitively disagrees with your insinuation that Alabama fans root for all players equally and therefore spend their money accordingly.

I know that CBS, ESPN, and such choose games based on who the good teams are in order to maximize ad revenue, and conference revenue is tied to ad revenue. And I know that the best teams have the best players, as winning percentage is directly tied to talent level. And I know Nick Saban knows that in order to win, you have to get the best players. And so, now we know that everyone at every level disagrees with your insinuation that just as many eyes will tune in to an Alabama game regardless if which 55 or so humans are in the uniforms.

Please, 14&Counting, you must get in contact with Nick Saban ASAP and notify him that it doesn't matter which 85 folks we have for our scholarships - it could literally be anybody and nothing will change. Folks will still tune in equally. Thank God for you, 14&Counting, you are an Angel. You are going to save the university so much money on recruiting.

Imagine being against students being able to make money off their name when it doesn't cost the university a cent.

We’re talking about universities. Nothing about the whole system is a free market. If it was, athletics departments wouldn’t be forced to spend thousands on sports with no chance of a return, and many athletics departments would’ve shut down long ago.

Also let’s not pretend this is the only area in college people are paid well below their market value.

Doctors going through residency, future professors student teaching. Hell when I was in school, I helped a professor license a technology worth thousands for the school and got a book stipend in return.

quote:

---

Imagine being against students being able to make money off their name when it doesn't cost the university a cent.

---

I wouldn’t say I’m against it. The morale posturing about it though is ridiculous.

And it will cost the university money. Not directly, but boosters will have to pay players to win instead of donating to the university.

At other universities, it’ll hurt the fans because they’ll have to close their athletic departments because they can’t remain the slightest bit competitive.