re: JFF on the Cover of Time-"It's time to pay college athletes"

quote:

---

Ok. Just 2 years ago LSU went through this with Honey Badger. There were t-shirts being sold literally on street corners.

---

Not even in the same stratosphere.

quote:

---

Basically, a booster could then promise to pay a player hundreds of thousands of dollars "for an autograph" if they chose a certain school.

---

So take the boosters out of it? How about this: Open up the NCAA store (which already exists so there's little extra work involved by anybody) to include autographed merchandise, jerseys with an actual name, etc. Pay the players a cut of the take. At the same time, add a rule outlawing mass signings. The Title IX argument goes away since any athlete in any sport would be eligible.

I don't have strong feelings about this one way or the other, but some of the arguments against some sort of payment don't make sense to me.

ETA: Sheesh, I can't keep up. KaiserSoze99 had pretty much the same idea... 6 pages ago.

The scenario you described is not what I have advocated.

Again:

Let players profit from their name and likeness through University licensed products bearing their names and likeness. Make it a set percentage cut for all players. For every jersey, photograph, action figure, whatever, bearing that player's name and likeness, that player will receive XXX% of the proceeds.

Addressing Concerns:

Title 9:

Q: But, but, not fair. Nobody gives a frick about softball.

A: Now it's fair. Football brings the money that pays for your irrelevant sport. What to change it? Find a way to make your sport....and program...relevant to the point where people want to buy player merchandise. Equal opportunity, not equal results, commies.

Lack of Parity:

Q: But, but poor schools that nobody gives a frick about will suffer and be forced to drop down to FCS.

A: That's where they belong anyway. The NCAA was stupid to allow this many teams rise to FBS status. The differences in the programs are night and day. It's like the New York Yankees v. the Frisco Rough Riders. A bunch of the "small time" programs need to GTFO anyway. They couldn't compete before. Why does this change things?

Q: But, booster can buy 50,000 JFF jerseys and give A&M an unfair advantage.

A#1: The concern everyone seems to have is that this offers an opportunity to influence who signs based on a future under-the-table agreement to buy a bunch of the player's jerseys in exchange for the player's LOI. It's a huge risk for both parties involved. This type of response also naively ignores the truth and pretends it's not really happening, but let's be clear. EVER PROGRAM HAS BOOSTERS PAYING PLAYERS RIGHT NOW.

A#2: Also, SO THE EFF WHAT??? Player gets paid. Booster gets merchandise and the value of the player's LOI. The University gets paid.

Q: But, unfair advantage!!!

A: Look if boosters want to waste their money on a bunch of jerseys/etc., be my guest. If players want to sign a LOI based on a "promise" to buy his merch, be my guest. At least the University can benefit. Furthermore, a program will be more brand conscious and try to increase the value of it's brand so prospective players will know they are signing on to a winning product. Fans will want to purchase more stuff to help support the players. The University benefits from fanaticism. College football is better, more exciting.

CAN'T COMPETE? Make changes. Build a winning product. Stop trying to be a bunch of jealous, lazy, communist haters like Obama supporters. Don't hate the playaah....

Amateurism/Student-Athlete Status:

Q: So, you're just going to make a pro league now?

A: No. They don't get paid to play. They get paid for their name and likeness, just like anyone else would in any other situation.

quote:

---

Okay, what happens when people are only buying Johnny Manziel autographed merchandise and the rest of his team isn't making any money? You really think any coach would want to deal with that in his locker room? (I'm only using him as a reference point because of his popularity no flame intended)

---

I am not minimizing the problem you described, but it is completely irrelevant to what we have proposed. Jealousy is already a problem in ever single GD locker room on every team from junior high to the lingerie league, whether it's press coverage, playing time, scheme, etc. That's already a problem. This does not change things. Coaches benefit from having good players. They should be able to deal with the shite that comes with it.

Ahh, I see the Kool-Aid is still flowing from College Station, and the Jim Joneses are imbibing.

quote:

---

The average A&M alumni makes more than the average Texas alumni

---

Boy, you aggies grabbed hold of that non-scientific, self-reporting website Payscale.com and have milked it for every drop. That aggie honor code ain't worth shite any longer, so that is very dubious.

quote:

---

Texas has 450k living alumni, A&M has about 380k.

---

The number I've seen for A&M is 350K, which puts you just ahead of the University of North Texas at 326K. So?

quote:

---

we are now larger than they are and producing more graduates per year.

---

The College Station campus enrollment is not larger than The University of Texas at Austin's campus enrollment. Let's see if you can wrap your aggie head around that one.

quote:

---

maybe you missed how we are dropping $450 mill on rebuilding Kyle and it is already sold out and the money is accounted for to pay for it

---

Insert the "Geez, not this shite again" gif.

$320 million of the $450 million will be financed by bonds

quote:

---

TAMU donors also gave $13 million more than their longhorn counterparts last year.

---

Not when you break this down to annual contributions vs. capital contributions.

quote:

---

Annual Giving Programs exceed $23 million in donations while Major Gift Programs have averaged gifts of $15 million per year for the past three years

---

Major Gift Programs = support facilities construction for Texas A&M Athletics. Not a valid comparison when you include capital gifts and annual gifts in one pot, when The University of Texas is not currently undergoing a facilities overhaul.

LINK

Yep

how much for a signed copy again?


Anyway, the whole idea is a giant rabbit hole with no easy answers. I could see setting aside some of the profits to be distributed to all college athletes (I doubt title 9 lets you distribute it only to the players who played profitable sports)... but even that would be very difficult to manage.

I have yet to hear a good solution on how to make this kind of thing work in a real world setting.

I disagree with your apocalyptic assumptions and conclusions, but we will just have to agree to disagree. Neither of us are making the decisions anyway, so who gives a EFF what we think.

He was in USA Today too, see gif below...


Personally, I think this one needs to be stickied somewhere!