Started By
Message
Mike Leach: about buying recruits(players)
Posted on 10/3/19 at 11:42 pm
Posted on 10/3/19 at 11:42 pm
What you think about this? This is from Yahoo Sports
LINK
Washington State coach Mike Leach does not like the idea of college athletes being able to openly make money off their image and likeness rights like any other student.
Leach has previously spoken out about California’s impending law that would allow athletes in the state to take sponsorship and endorsement money. He told Yahoo Sports on Wednesday that college players being able to take money from third parties based on their status as college athletes would be akin to “openly buying players without a salary cap.”
“Obviously bigger schools with bigger media bases and richer alums are always going to have the biggest advantage,” Leach said in the video above. “Because it literally opens the door to buying players without really any salary cap. Even the NFL has a salary cap. This would be openly buying players without any salary cap. None whatsoever. Because virtually anybody can go up to anybody and say ‘Hey, I’ll endorse you for this or that.’”
Leach’s fears are already a reality in college sports and have been a reality in college sports for quite some time. The recent college basketball corruption trial revealed just how basketball players are being openly bought through shoe companies in the world of basketball recruiting. And you’re a fool if you believe similar things haven’t happened in the world of college football.
While the actual applicability of the California law is in question — it doesn’t go into effect until 2023 and the NCAA could amend its name, image and likeness rules before then — it’s not going to lead to the downfall of college sports as we know it as Yahoo Sports’ Dan Wetzel wrote on Monday. Allowing athletes to capitalize on their prominence as athletes is simply the free market and capitalism at work. And isn’t capitalism a tenet of American society?
If you’re looking for a deeper discussion regarding the potential impacts of college athletes being able to profit off their image rights, you should listen to this week’s episode of the Yahoo Sports College Podcast where Wetzel, Pat Forde and Pete Thamel take a good look at all the foreseen and maybe unforeseen possibilities if athletes had the same individual rights that other students had.
– – – – – – –
Nick Bromberg is a writer for Yahoo Sports.
LINK
Washington State coach Mike Leach does not like the idea of college athletes being able to openly make money off their image and likeness rights like any other student.
Leach has previously spoken out about California’s impending law that would allow athletes in the state to take sponsorship and endorsement money. He told Yahoo Sports on Wednesday that college players being able to take money from third parties based on their status as college athletes would be akin to “openly buying players without a salary cap.”
“Obviously bigger schools with bigger media bases and richer alums are always going to have the biggest advantage,” Leach said in the video above. “Because it literally opens the door to buying players without really any salary cap. Even the NFL has a salary cap. This would be openly buying players without any salary cap. None whatsoever. Because virtually anybody can go up to anybody and say ‘Hey, I’ll endorse you for this or that.’”
Leach’s fears are already a reality in college sports and have been a reality in college sports for quite some time. The recent college basketball corruption trial revealed just how basketball players are being openly bought through shoe companies in the world of basketball recruiting. And you’re a fool if you believe similar things haven’t happened in the world of college football.
While the actual applicability of the California law is in question — it doesn’t go into effect until 2023 and the NCAA could amend its name, image and likeness rules before then — it’s not going to lead to the downfall of college sports as we know it as Yahoo Sports’ Dan Wetzel wrote on Monday. Allowing athletes to capitalize on their prominence as athletes is simply the free market and capitalism at work. And isn’t capitalism a tenet of American society?
If you’re looking for a deeper discussion regarding the potential impacts of college athletes being able to profit off their image rights, you should listen to this week’s episode of the Yahoo Sports College Podcast where Wetzel, Pat Forde and Pete Thamel take a good look at all the foreseen and maybe unforeseen possibilities if athletes had the same individual rights that other students had.
– – – – – – –
Nick Bromberg is a writer for Yahoo Sports.
This post was edited on 10/4/19 at 12:12 am
21
Posted on 10/3/19 at 11:44 pm to TrueLefty
(no message)
This post was edited on 10/4/19 at 3:29 am
Posted on 10/3/19 at 11:44 pm to TrueLefty
He’s right
Texas A&M would finally have a chance
Texas A&M would finally have a chance
This post was edited on 10/3/19 at 11:45 pm
Posted on 10/4/19 at 12:05 am to TrueLefty
Just Copy and Paste the synopsis. I don't want to click on that shite. 
Posted on 10/4/19 at 12:08 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Go to Yahoo sports Link
Washington State coach Mike Leach does not like the idea of college athletes being able to openly make money off their image and likeness rights like any other student.
Leach has previously spoken out about California’s impending law that would allow athletes in the state to take sponsorship and endorsement money. He told Yahoo Sports on Wednesday that college players being able to take money from third parties based on their status as college athletes would be akin to “openly buying players without a salary cap.”
“Obviously bigger schools with bigger media bases and richer alums are always going to have the biggest advantage,” Leach said in the video above. “Because it literally opens the door to buying players without really any salary cap. Even the NFL has a salary cap. This would be openly buying players without any salary cap. None whatsoever. Because virtually anybody can go up to anybody and say ‘Hey, I’ll endorse you for this or that.’”
Leach’s fears are already a reality in college sports and have been a reality in college sports for quite some time. The recent college basketball corruption trial revealed just how basketball players are being openly bought through shoe companies in the world of basketball recruiting. And you’re a fool if you believe similar things haven’t happened in the world of college football.
While the actual applicability of the California law is in question — it doesn’t go into effect until 2023 and the NCAA could amend its name, image and likeness rules before then — it’s not going to lead to the downfall of college sports as we know it as Yahoo Sports’ Dan Wetzel wrote on Monday. Allowing athletes to capitalize on their prominence as athletes is simply the free market and capitalism at work. And isn’t capitalism a tenet of American society?
If you’re looking for a deeper discussion regarding the potential impacts of college athletes being able to profit off their image rights, you should listen to this week’s episode of the Yahoo Sports College Podcast where Wetzel, Pat Forde and Pete Thamel take a good look at all the foreseen and maybe unforeseen possibilities if athletes had the same individual rights that other students had.
– – – – – – –
Nick Bromberg is a writer for Yahoo Sports.
Washington State coach Mike Leach does not like the idea of college athletes being able to openly make money off their image and likeness rights like any other student.
Leach has previously spoken out about California’s impending law that would allow athletes in the state to take sponsorship and endorsement money. He told Yahoo Sports on Wednesday that college players being able to take money from third parties based on their status as college athletes would be akin to “openly buying players without a salary cap.”
“Obviously bigger schools with bigger media bases and richer alums are always going to have the biggest advantage,” Leach said in the video above. “Because it literally opens the door to buying players without really any salary cap. Even the NFL has a salary cap. This would be openly buying players without any salary cap. None whatsoever. Because virtually anybody can go up to anybody and say ‘Hey, I’ll endorse you for this or that.’”
Leach’s fears are already a reality in college sports and have been a reality in college sports for quite some time. The recent college basketball corruption trial revealed just how basketball players are being openly bought through shoe companies in the world of basketball recruiting. And you’re a fool if you believe similar things haven’t happened in the world of college football.
While the actual applicability of the California law is in question — it doesn’t go into effect until 2023 and the NCAA could amend its name, image and likeness rules before then — it’s not going to lead to the downfall of college sports as we know it as Yahoo Sports’ Dan Wetzel wrote on Monday. Allowing athletes to capitalize on their prominence as athletes is simply the free market and capitalism at work. And isn’t capitalism a tenet of American society?
If you’re looking for a deeper discussion regarding the potential impacts of college athletes being able to profit off their image rights, you should listen to this week’s episode of the Yahoo Sports College Podcast where Wetzel, Pat Forde and Pete Thamel take a good look at all the foreseen and maybe unforeseen possibilities if athletes had the same individual rights that other students had.
– – – – – – –
Nick Bromberg is a writer for Yahoo Sports.
This post was edited on 10/4/19 at 12:13 am
Posted on 10/4/19 at 12:31 am to TrueLefty
frick, now I have a migraine. Paragraphs dude.............my eyes are bleeding.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 12:48 am to TrueLefty
quote:
Allowing athletes to capitalize on their prominence as athletes is simply the free market and capitalism at work. And isn’t capitalism a tenet of American society?
So is Wentzel arguing that salary caps in the NFL are "un-American?" Because Leach has a point - there would be no salary cap if this law goes into place.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 12:55 am to TrueLefty
He’s 100% correct
The vast majority of the elite recruits all go to a handful of schools anyway, but this would make it worse
The vast majority of the elite recruits all go to a handful of schools anyway, but this would make it worse
Posted on 10/4/19 at 2:51 am to TrueLefty
Pretty much what a lot of us have been saying. It is going to create an ever bigger discrepancy in recruiting than there is now.
Hey Cam Newton, come to Auburn. We can get you a deal signing EA Sports video game boxes. 180K in total. And such. There would be no way to regulate it and larger schools would have the advantage of money...
Hey Cam Newton, come to Auburn. We can get you a deal signing EA Sports video game boxes. 180K in total. And such. There would be no way to regulate it and larger schools would have the advantage of money...
Posted on 10/4/19 at 5:10 am to LanierSpots
He does have a point. Although, I’m not too worried about it. California is the most inclusive, #metoo, gender neutral state in the Union. How long do you think it will be until the third string women’s lacrosse team bring a lawsuit because the first string-white male quarterback is making more in endorsements? The SJWs won’t just sit by and let that happen. Even though it’s the free market at work, those wackos won’t care and will rally the troops.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 5:19 am to TrueLefty
Yahoo's writer's miss Leach's point. It's not the student/player's "rights" that are at issue here, it's the bigger issue. The fans and alums. Those who cling to and love the my school, my college aura even though they never went there. Fans make college football, not players.
Players come and go, the fans stay and support. They will gradually or maybe even quickly peel off by a substantial number if this becomes an open minor league sport. The NCAA will try and limit the amount of cash available but once the genie is out of the bottle schools will do workarounds, wealthy alums will do workarounds. The Mercedes Benz Alabama Crimson Tide. The Consolidated Banks Georgia Bulldogs. The Yellow Wood Auburn Tigers. The Big OIL Aggies.
Players come and go, the fans stay and support. They will gradually or maybe even quickly peel off by a substantial number if this becomes an open minor league sport. The NCAA will try and limit the amount of cash available but once the genie is out of the bottle schools will do workarounds, wealthy alums will do workarounds. The Mercedes Benz Alabama Crimson Tide. The Consolidated Banks Georgia Bulldogs. The Yellow Wood Auburn Tigers. The Big OIL Aggies.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 6:43 am to TrueLefty
He is absolutely correct. Which is why you dont pay the athletes individually, you pay I to a pot that is equally shared with all the athletes. Very similar to the way licensing money is equally shared between schools. After all no one player has success on his own. This way everyone gets paid, bit mot nearly enough to destroy the game.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 6:51 am to TrueLefty
Leach is right once again - and college coaches should be the ones most threatened by this.
No way big money contracts go to coaches anymore. Smart programs dedicate the bulk of the budget to buying the best players. Jeff Luhnow types (Astros) will become the most important part of a football program.
No way big money contracts go to coaches anymore. Smart programs dedicate the bulk of the budget to buying the best players. Jeff Luhnow types (Astros) will become the most important part of a football program.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 7:30 am to Pvt Hudson
quote:
Leach is right once again - and college coaches should be the ones most threatened by this.
No way big money contracts go to coaches anymore. Smart programs dedicate the bulk of the budget to buying the best players. Jeff Luhnow types (Astros) will become the most important part of a football program.
This is exactly right. If you are an enterprising school with deep pockets, trade out the $10 million staff for a $2 million staff and spend that money on players.
The more I think about it, the more I think that is probably more fair. We have turned college football coaches into gods and paid them like kings. A good high school coach could do the same job.
This could be Tennessee's chance to rise like a Phoenix from the ashes.
In a couple of years fire Pruitt, get a cheap staff and start the buying process.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 7:55 am to Cadello
74-72
Posted on 10/4/19 at 7:58 am to Placekicker
quote:
He does have a point. Although, I’m not too worried about it. California is the most inclusive, #metoo, gender neutral state in the Union. How long do you think it will be until the third string women’s lacrosse team bring a lawsuit because the first string-white male quarterback is making more in endorsements? The SJWs won’t just sit by and let that happen. Even though it’s the free market at work, those wackos won’t care and will rally the troops.
I agree with you but there is some major flaws in this kind of thinking.
#1, like it or not but a lot of the bad shite we have to deal with on a daily basis started in the state of California.
#2 If this box is opened and players are allowed to get money by outside entities, I dont think that box can ever be closed again. It will then have to be dealt with in every thing that is college sports.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 8:00 am to LanierSpots
quote:
Pretty much what a lot of us have been saying. It is going to create an ever bigger discrepancy in recruiting than there is now.
We will be going back to the old days of college football when teams openly stockpiled bought and paid for players, only this time it would be within the rules if this becomes the law of the land.
This is a really slippery slope here and it can cause a lot of harm.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 8:06 am to JesusQuintana
quote:
He’s 100% correct
Hey, Johnny 5*, Tuscaloosa Dodge would pay you $100,000 a year if you came to Bama and let us put your face on our ads.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 8:21 am to Cadello
quote:I am on team slippery slope with the pay to play argument, but I know A&M would be one of the biggest beneficiaries so I'm good either way.
Texas A&M would finally have a chance
Can't figure out how to do it under the table yet, but alumni throwing down "endorsements" should be easy enough.
Posted on 10/4/19 at 8:22 am to TrueLefty
Leech’s words aren’t anti-free enterprise. When you have a sports league, teams need to have equal opportunities to be good. Without balance, leagues suffer. Professional basketball and baseball have suffered from a lack of balance. There are only a few teams that can have sustained success.
Part of the popularity of the NFL is that every fan base believes that their team could reach the top. Yet the NFL has a “salary cap “ and true division of revenue. Isn’t that anti-“free market”? What is good for the entire league is what is really important and the NFL gets that.
The road we are going down in NCAA football is going to lead us to 10 teams that can compete and the rest of us will be the Washington Generals to the Harlem Globetrotters. Fan interest will drop considerably without the hope that your team can have sustained success. 95% of college football is about to turn into Vanderbilt.
Part of the popularity of the NFL is that every fan base believes that their team could reach the top. Yet the NFL has a “salary cap “ and true division of revenue. Isn’t that anti-“free market”? What is good for the entire league is what is really important and the NFL gets that.
The road we are going down in NCAA football is going to lead us to 10 teams that can compete and the rest of us will be the Washington Generals to the Harlem Globetrotters. Fan interest will drop considerably without the hope that your team can have sustained success. 95% of college football is about to turn into Vanderbilt.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News