Started By
Message
re: Co/Wa in process of Passing their version Of Fair Pay for Play.. Forbes NCAA will lose
Posted on 9/11/19 at 3:10 am to skrayper
Posted on 9/11/19 at 3:10 am to skrayper
quote:
There's the nail in this coffin. The NCAA won't want this to go too far, because then the government will take a closer look at their non-profit status. It will almost assuredly go away; how does a non-charitable organization bring in billions in revenue and remain considered a non-profit?
By avoiding scrutiny of their books.
This is ignorant as hell, you realize the NFL is a non-profit as well, right? Has nothing to do with their "books"
3
Posted on 9/11/19 at 3:52 am to Jjdoc
Recruiting implications?
Posted on 9/11/19 at 5:47 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Thoughts now?
Good
Posted on 9/11/19 at 5:59 am to bbrownso
quote:
I don't know, maybe the possibility of HUGE competitive disadvantages?
As if there isn't already?
Posted on 9/11/19 at 7:31 am to JesusQuintana
It is really difficult to tell a legal adult they can't work and make money. If/when the players form a union, then the sport is done. This is probably the initial step of the P5 separating into their own conference.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 7:33 am to lefty08
quote:
This is ignorant as hell,
No it's not.
Again, this law has passed and the Governor is expected to sign it.
It's law. Do the colleges in Cali break the LAW and punish the players and face the penalties of breaking the law or follow the rules of the NCAA.
the NCAA will fold and will before 2023
Posted on 9/11/19 at 7:40 am to Jjdoc
quote:
"I just want to say, 'NCAA, don't threaten California. Don't threaten us'," Kamlager-Dove said. "Because we have formidable schools. We have formidable alumni. And we have formidable viewership.
USC, UCLA, Cal, and Stanford are all formidable academic schools
Of these, only SC is formidable in college football, and they are not what they were
All have formidable alumni but how many are season ticket holders and attend games because they are not filling their venues
PACN is the worst performing P5 network (the funding that drives the horsecart) and their CCG can not come close to selling out.
Basic economics say supply = demand
Clearly the PAC fans are not willing to pay for what they have, why would they pay more?
quote:
Thoughts now?
Oregon is the lead dog in Oregon and their pipeline (sugar daddy) is Phil Knight and Nike. If the B1G and SEC boycotted Nike do you think Phil Knight wants that heat on the Ducks money pipeline?
Posted on 9/11/19 at 7:44 am to Jjdoc
The NCAA doesn't have to throw them out, they will just do what they've always done. They will rule players who receive impermissible benefits ineligible.
These dipshit left coast lawmakers are basically forcing the universities to decide between paying players, playing those paid players and being ineligible for any sort of NCAA championship OR tell the players too bad, we're choosing not to pay you so we can continue to compete.
Good luck with that.
These dipshit left coast lawmakers are basically forcing the universities to decide between paying players, playing those paid players and being ineligible for any sort of NCAA championship OR tell the players too bad, we're choosing not to pay you so we can continue to compete.
Good luck with that.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 8:00 am to RB10
quote:
The NCAA doesn't have to throw them out, they will just do what they've always done. They will rule players who receive impermissible benefits ineligible.
Bingo!
If the west coast (CA + CO + WA) get on board the kids will get thrown out by the NCAA and the other P5's will get stronger at the PAC's expense. Problem is the PAC has the hardest time selling their product ant they are shooting themselves in the foot by pursuing this.
In the end, lawyers and agents just want a cut, which is the real travesty for these 18 to 22 year old kids.
This post was edited on 9/11/19 at 8:03 am
Posted on 9/11/19 at 8:28 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Call their Bluff... SCOTUS... here we come.
Here's hoping for this route because it's a straight up win for the NCAA.
States attempting to tell voluntary organizations how they must conduct their business is about as straight up a 1st amendment violation that one can get.
Cali and the rest of the nuts are free to tell their state schools that you can't participate in organizations that don't let players profit off their names but they can't force those organizations (particularly one located in another state) to change their rules.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 8:32 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Do the colleges in Cali break the LAW and punish the players and face the penalties of breaking the law or follow the rules of the NCAA.
Colleges in CA don't have to do a damn thing. NCAA rules players in CA ineligible. Kids can not play or games are forfeit. CA lawmakers wind up with egg on their face when CA schools lose their best players. PACN goes bust. Other P5's laughs all the way to the bank. As side issue, loss of revenue means Title IX sports on the west coast get discontinued for lack of money to operate.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 8:39 am to Jjdoc
So we are paying every athlete of every sport at every school in the United States? where is all of this money supposed to come from? Just wait till the SWAC schools take their prospective states to court over this. And you will have to pay Div 2 also. And then high schools.
If we can all agree on something it’s that California can frick up something royally. Their jealousy of not competing nationally for championships anymore has caused them to pick the wrong fight.
This isn’t about society or doing what’s right. This is what happens when you overlook the PAC-10 in the CFP polls. They unleash the liberals to try to destroy something that a majority of the nation loves and supports. We should sell the whole fricking state to China and be done with our debt and their dumbassery.
where is all of this money supposed to come from? Just wait till the SWAC schools take their prospective states to court over this. And you will have to pay Div 2 also. And then high schools. If we can all agree on something it’s that California can frick up something royally. Their jealousy of not competing nationally for championships anymore has caused them to pick the wrong fight.
This isn’t about society or doing what’s right. This is what happens when you overlook the PAC-10 in the CFP polls. They unleash the liberals to try to destroy something that a majority of the nation loves and supports. We should sell the whole fricking state to China and be done with our debt and their dumbassery.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 8:47 am to Jjdoc
I am sure the blue blood programs would benefit more than others, but other than that, I can't see the harm in allowing players to make money on their celebrity. It wouldn't be the college that pays the guys for endorsement deals.
The fact that the blue blood programs would be a magnet for the elite athletes, though, would probably kill the sport in the long run. I'm not sure how much longer tackle football, as we know it, will last anyway.
I would also note that, as I understand it (and I haven't even read the article), this is only for endorsement type deals, so Title IX has no bearing on this. I assume this ruling would apply to any athlete, male or female, whose celebrity would warrant an offer for endorsement of a product or event.
Typing this post it did occur to me that there might be another type fallout. The guys or girls popular enough to get an endorsement gig might irritate other players on that team that don't get that, so it could divide a team.
The fact that the blue blood programs would be a magnet for the elite athletes, though, would probably kill the sport in the long run. I'm not sure how much longer tackle football, as we know it, will last anyway.
I would also note that, as I understand it (and I haven't even read the article), this is only for endorsement type deals, so Title IX has no bearing on this. I assume this ruling would apply to any athlete, male or female, whose celebrity would warrant an offer for endorsement of a product or event.
Typing this post it did occur to me that there might be another type fallout. The guys or girls popular enough to get an endorsement gig might irritate other players on that team that don't get that, so it could divide a team.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 9:38 am to Jjdoc
quote:
No... that's not an option. I believe you are suggesting this:
- Billy signa with an agent (breaking rules) and then gets a shoe deal(breaking NCAA rules).
- the college does nothing
- Player shows up for game
- Ncaa says play him, and you are have a post season ban for a long time.
- Law says, you don't play him and we come after you legally.
There is no 3rd option.
That’s not accurate. The school would not be suspending the player for impermissible benefits. The NCAA would be the one doing that. Technically the school would have done nothing to prevent the player from getting an endorsement
Posted on 9/11/19 at 9:42 am to Jjdoc
Pac12 trying to find a way back to relevance.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 9:44 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
As side issue, loss of revenue means Title IX sports on the west coast get discontinued for lack of money to operate.
The Title IX issue is interesting to me. The NCAA may be told to kick rocks if/when this winds up in court. But Title IX is federal law. Anyone know the Title IX implications of pay-to-play?
This post was edited on 9/11/19 at 9:45 am
Posted on 9/11/19 at 9:51 am to Jjdoc
Are antitrust laws applicable here? The NCAA is largely considered amateur, and not a business, do those laws apply?
Posted on 9/11/19 at 11:11 am to Leopold
The NCAA basically just released a “shut up, stupid” response to the California legislation lol
Posted on 9/11/19 at 11:16 am to AUCE05
quote:
It is really difficult to tell a legal adult they can't work and make money. If/when the players form a union, then the sport is done. This is probably the initial step of the P5 separating into their own conference.
Literally nobody says they cannot work. The NCAA says they cannot make money off their status as an athlete. Nobody makes them play college football.
Players have already tried to unionize. It made it all the way to the Obama administration’s (and thus union friendly) NLRB. The players lost.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 11:33 am to Jjdoc
quote:Tell us how many PAC12 schools plan to allow their student-athletes to hire agents, accept $$ from their likeness, names and images?
It's already passed. As soon as the Governor signs it, the count down begins until the NCAA changes or it goes to court.
I don't see this hitting the courts any time soon. At least not until the first program reports to the NCAA that their athletes are receiving impermissible benefits and the NCAA rules them ineligible.
Page 4 of 6
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News