Started By
Message
re: New bill to allow athletes to get paid.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:19 pm to BFANLC
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:19 pm to BFANLC
quote:
New bill to allow athletes to get paid.
I don't disagree with the intent of the bill necessarily, but I'm not sure I agree with the federal government trying to tell a private organization what they can or can't require of its members. Pretty slippery slope precedent to set in how that could be applied elsewhere
quote:
The new bill also specifically prohibits the NCAA or conferences from doing anything that would prevent athletes from organizing under collective representation to sell their licensing rights as a group
the unionization of student athletes has been heard pretty recently before the NLRB when the Northwestern football team tried to unionize. It was shot down unanimously, and the ruling was based largely on the slippery slope that unionizing a football team could create and managing legal problems of private schools falling under the jurisdiction of the NLRB and public schools under the jurisdiction of different state laws.
This post was edited on 2/4/21 at 2:28 pm
1
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:20 pm to BFANLC
quote:
Somethings I agree with in this article.
The biggest thing I agree with is allowing undrafted players to return to school and play without penalty, as long as they have not received any compensation. I've never even thought hiring an agent in and of itself should make a player ineligible. It's basically the same as hiring a lawyer.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:22 pm to Dstllsu
quote:
It would make it true amateur athletics. Also it would suck to watch.
No it wouldn't.
It doesn't suck to watch high school football. You'd have teams made up of athletic, smart kids. They'd improve in programs just like they do now, and the product on the field would be just as fun as it is now.
Think about it like when any of the racing series change the rules to slow down the cars? Are the races boring? Did baseball become boring when they cracked down on juicing and home runs plummeted?
Of course not. Exactly the same thing would happen with college football. You wouldn't even notice the difference.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:24 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
Did baseball become boring when they cracked down on juicing and home runs plummeted?
this isn't the best analogy. The ratings say it absolutely did, but I do understand your point.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:24 pm to BFANLC
I'll be honest...I don't think this legislation will ever pass, because at some point the feminists/progressives will realize that a handful of men are about to get a lot of money while women get nothing. I know Gillibrand is one of the sponsors, but once that wing of the party figures this out and starts to kick and scream, it will be shot down.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:25 pm to lsufball19
quote:
I'm not sure I agree with the federal government trying to tell a private organization what they can or can't require of its members
This is seeming more and more just what reality is.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:27 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
I know Gillibrand is one of the sponsors, but once that wing of the party figures this out and starts to kick and scream, it will be shot down.
it is to late for them to reverse course now.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:27 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
It doesn't suck to watch high school football
I guess that's opinion based. I definitely don't put money into high school football.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:29 pm to Dstllsu
quote:
I definitely don't put money into high school football.
Depends what high school you are talking about. Have you seen some of the High School Stadiums in Texas?
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:31 pm to civiltiger07
quote:
I know Gillibrand is one of the sponsors, but once that wing of the party figures this out and starts to kick and scream, it will be shot down.
it is to late for them to reverse course now.
"Them"? Who is "them"? It hasn't been voted on yet. If you click on the "all actions" link, this is all that has happened:
12/17/2020 Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Action By: Senate
It hasn't even been voted on in committee yet. It's a helluva long way from becoming law. Just wait until it gets to the House of Representatives, which has feminists/progressives far more vocal and greater in number.
Do you think AOC and her crowd will sit quietly? I doubt it.
This post was edited on 2/4/21 at 2:33 pm
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:33 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
People who push this bill forget that even if athletes can make money off NIL, they still can't use the school's name, logo, or uniform in the ad.
Only a few elite players have the name recognition to make big money off NIL. In 2019, outside of Trevor Lawrence maybe doing Pantene commercials, or Tua shilling for Dole Pineapple, who else had the face and name recognition nationally?
I think what this would produce is shoe companies jumping in to sign players to endorsement deals while still in college. Kind of like the college basketball scandal, but now it would be legal. You're right, this would apply to a very small minority of college athletes. Most wouldn't be making any money from NIL, and the majority that do would likely be limited to local deals for local businesses, which isn't going to yield much money to the players. But you're absolutely right, without being able to use their affiliation to the university in marketing, very very few have the name/face recognition alone to make significant earnings of their "likeness." I guess I'll add that some may be able to make a little cash off of their social media accounts, but I have no idea what kind of following it takes to start getting paid a lot.
quote:
Now it's true that locally players might be able to show up at a shopping mall and sign autographs for a few bucks. But not only will this expand the gap between the elite schools and the rest...it will expand the gap between football and other athletes, and even more between males and females.
agree 100%. NIL would be horrible for the have-nots and non-revenue sports
This post was edited on 2/4/21 at 2:35 pm
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:37 pm to Cocotheape
quote:
This will change nothing except that the players will get paid above the table.
Gonna be entertaining seeing a bunch of young and ignorant student athletes getting audited once they start receiving real money and not understanding they have to pay taxes on it. They don't have to worry about paying taxes on the money given to them under the table
This post was edited on 2/4/21 at 2:39 pm
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:41 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
"Them"? Who is "them"?
the politicians that are pushing these bills, like Gillibrand.
This doesn't really matter at this point. All of this is just pandering from politicians trying to claim they did something. The NCAA is already on course to allow profiting from name image and likeness.
This post was edited on 2/4/21 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:45 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
Seriously...I pay about $500 per seat, per year, for my 4 season tickets, sideline, 5 yard line, upper deck, for 7 home games. Calculate the price for the premium game and a percentage of the Tide Pride donation, and I'm paying maybe $125 per ticket for LSU this year.
I think the big issue comes with fans who aren't living locally. We have seats in the lower level around the 5 yard line. Let's just say the average cost per ticket per game is $100. We have 4. That's $400 per game just for tickets. My family lives in Memphis, 6 hours from Baton Rouge. That's gonna be 2.5 tanks of gas roundtrip (~$125), hotel $300-400/night for 2 nights depending on the game, and we'll call it 3-4 meals worth of food plus alcohol, conessions, etc. That doesn't even include the couple of grand in donations per seat each year to stay where we are. And these expenses have grown exponentially the past 20 years. Donations used to be small, tickets were less than half as expensive as they are now, gas was cheaper, and so was lodging. It's just a lot of money for a lot of non-local season ticket holders to continue to pay more and more each year to go to these games, especially now that every game is on TV when only maybe half of your games were 20 years ago.
This post was edited on 2/4/21 at 2:59 pm
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:45 pm to lsufball19
quote:
agree 100%. NIL would be horrible for the have-nots and non-revenue sports
Congress, especially Democrats, have fought for decades to ensure that female athletes receive all the same benefits as male athletes. It's one reason, for example, why players can't sell their tickets. Now, if this legislation is signed into law, a large part of that will be undone.
This post was edited on 2/4/21 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:47 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Gonna be entertaining seeing a bunch of young and ignorant student athletes getting audited once they start receiving real money and not understanding they have to pay taxes on it. They don't have to worry about paying taxes on the money given to them under the table
guaranteed players will run into tax trouble, but that is true with people from every walk of life. So I don't see it as a reason not to allow it.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:52 pm to civiltiger07
quote:
So you are saying Bama football players are not getting paid something on the side right now?
Anybody who thinks their team has no impermissible benefits going to any of their players is a fool. Saban has no interest in getting any assistance from some idiot boosters trying to “help” by giving them out. Alabama doesn’t need to hand out Happy Meals full of cash, and they don’t need to give out cars. Saban knows the best way to cripple a program for a long time is to get nailed for recruiting violations, and if you think there is some widespread corruption where he either participates in or tolerates it, then you’re a fool too. Morons and bad coaches like Mike Dubose think they have to cheat, Saban doesn’t. Of course, if you have some real evidence that Alabama cheats, other than vague suspicions and pictures of players standing next to a Dodge Charger, I’m willing to reevaluate that.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:53 pm to BamaGradinTn
Here's another question: could Alabama, for example, use NIL to basically increase their football scholarships above 85?
Let's say that Nick Saban's Mercedes considers entering into a contract to pay the best player an endorsement deal for $100,000 a year. But then, they agree to pay the player an extra $100,000 a year, and the player agrees to pay his own way to school, freeing up a scholarship for Bama to use on someone else.
This whole system will have ample opportunities for abuse.
Let's say that Nick Saban's Mercedes considers entering into a contract to pay the best player an endorsement deal for $100,000 a year. But then, they agree to pay the player an extra $100,000 a year, and the player agrees to pay his own way to school, freeing up a scholarship for Bama to use on someone else.
This whole system will have ample opportunities for abuse.
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:55 pm to civiltiger07
quote:
guaranteed players will run into tax trouble, but that is true with people from every walk of life. So I don't see it as a reason not to allow it.
Most people have other assets and/or jobs to pay down tax debt owed. You know most 18-21 year old college athletes are going to blow all that money on stupid shite and cars (because that's what most college kids do when they have money) that lose value without any other resources to even pay off a massive tax liability to the IRS. And most people who run into tax trouble have know some semblance of what they're doing (not paying taxes when they should be). How many 18 year olds have you known have had 1099 types of jobs where it's on them to take out enough for taxes, pay quarterly, file their returns, etc? Most college kids are still claimed as dependents on their parents' returns or are standard W2 earners who have their employers take out taxes for them. They're not going to be thinking about hiring a CPA to help them or paying someone to help manage their finances because they don't need to, and most college football players probably won't be thinking about that either.
This post was edited on 2/4/21 at 2:56 pm
Posted on 2/4/21 at 2:56 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Gonna be entertaining seeing a bunch of young and ignorant student athletes getting audited once they start receiving real money and not understanding they have to pay taxes on it.
I don't know about LSU, but I'm pretty sure that somewhere on campus in Tuscaloosa there are professors who teach classes in tax law. Saban brings in experts to counsel players about dealing the media, transitioning to professional life, etc., etc. I'm sure we'll have this covered also. Orgeron, however? 
This post was edited on 2/4/21 at 2:58 pm
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News